FY2013 Official Budget - Austin ISD

FY2013 

Governmental Funds Adopted August 28, 2012 

AUSTIN Independent School District 

Austin, TX - Travis County 

OFFICIAL BUDGET 

1111 West Sixth Street 

Austin, TX 787073 

512.414.1700 

www.austinisd.org

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Table of Contents 

Austin Independent School District 

Awards and Acknowledgements 

ASBO-Meritorious Budget Award for Excellence in Budget Presentation 

GFOA-Distinguished Budget Presentation Award 

Texas Comptroller Gold Leadership Circle Award 

Adopted Budget FY2013 

Introduction………………….………………………………….…………………………………………………… 1 

Organization…………………………………..……………………………………..……………………………… 73 

Financial………………………..…………………………………………….……………………………………… 117 

Informational………………………………...………….…………….…...…….………………………………… 367 

Glossary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 471 

Mission Statement…………..…………………………………………….………………………………………… 

i 

Introduction 

District Address and Officials …………..…………………………………………….…………………………… 1 

Executive Summary…………………………………...…………………….……………………………………… 2 

Strategic Plan Framework……………………………………………………………………………………. 4 

Facts about Austin Independent School District….……..……………………………………………………… 5 

Academic Programs…………….….………………………………...……………………………………………… 7 

Academic Ratings………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 

Academic Assessment & Accountability………….….……..…………………………………………………… 9 

Financial Accountability………………………………………………………………………………………… 19 

Budget Policies & Development Procedures………………………………………………………………… 21 

Milestones of the Budget Process………………………………………………………………………………… 22 

Board Goals………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 23 

Financial Structure & Basis for Accounting………………………………………………………………….. 24 

Account Code Structure………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 

Budget Challenges…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26 

Budget Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 30 

Major Funds…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 32 

Governmental Funds………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33 

General Fund………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37 

Tax Rates……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 46 

Property Values……………………………………………………...…….……………………………………….. 49 

Food Service Fund………………………………………………………………………………………………....… 56 

Debt Service Fund………………………………………………………………………………………….………… 58 

Capital Projects Fund………………………………………………………………………………………………… 60 

Grant Funds…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 62 

Enrollment Growth…………..….......………..…………………………………………………….….....………… 66 

Staffing………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 67 

Salaries & Benefits…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 68 

Future Year Budget Projections…..…….…………………………………………….….………………………… 68 

Summary……...………………………………………………………....…………………………………………… 71

Table of Contents 


Organization 

School Districts in the Surrounding Area………………..………………………………………………………… 73 

Austin ISD - District Boundaries………….………………………………………………………………………… 74 

Overview of Austin Independent School District……….……....………………………………………………… 75 

Campus Listing……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 76 

Austin ISD Calendar for FY2013……………..…………………………………………………………………..… 80 

Organizational Structure……………..………...………………………………..…..……………...……………… 81 

AISD Organizational Chart………………........………............………………………...…………..……… 82 

Fund Structure Diagram…………………………………………………………….……………………………… 84 

Financial Structure and Basis for Accounting…...….……....…...……………………………………………… 85 

Account Code Structure……………………..……….……………………………………………………………… 92 

Fund Codes…………………………………………….……………………………………………………… 93 

Function Codes………………………………………...……………………………………………………… 96 

Revenue Object Codes…...…………….……...…………………..………………………………………… 99 

Expenditure Object Codes………….…...….…………….………………………………………………… 100 

Function/Program Intent Code Matrix……………………………………………………………………… 103 

Significant Financial Policies & Procedures…………………..…….…………………………………………… 104 

Budget Policies & Development Procedures…………………….…………….………………………………… 108 

Board Goals, Strategies to Achieve Goals, and Budget Parameters…………………………………………. 110 

Strategic Plan Framework…………………………………………………………………………………………… 111 

Budget Development Process………………...……………….…………………………………………………… 112 

Budget Administration and Management Process………………………………………...……………………… 114 

Financial 

Financial Overview………………………………………………………………..………………………………… 117 

Budget Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 118 

Governmental Funds……………………..……….………………………………………………………………… 118 

General Fund ……………………………………………..………………………………………………………… 128 

Revenue and Expenditure Assumptions…………………………………………………………………… 133 

Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance-Five Year Comparison……… 137 

General Fund Campus Information………..……………………………………………………………....… 147 

AISD High Schools……………………………………………………………………………………… 149 

AISD Middle Schools…….....…………………………………………………………………………… 168 

AISD Elementary Schools…………………………………………………………….………………… 187 

AISD Special Campuses…..….....…………………………………………………………………… 272 

General Fund Departmental Non-Campus Information…..…..….……………………………………… 279 

Food Service………………….……..…………………………..…..…..………………………………………...… 338 


Debt Service …….…….……………………………………………………………………..............………...…… 341 


Debt Service Policy-CCA (Legal)…………………………...…..….………………………………………. 345 

Capital Projects……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 347 

2008 Bond Proposition Detail………………………………………………………………………………… 348 

Grant Funds…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 358 

Proprietary Funds…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 364

Informational 

Taxable Value Information………………………………………………………………………………………… 367 

Impact of Tax Levy on Single Family Residence………………………………………………………………… 374 

Student Information………………………………………………………………………………………………… 376 

Staffing………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 382 

Future Year Budget Projections…………………………………………………………………………………… 385 

Buildings and Square Footage……………………………………………………………………………………… 388 

Benchmarks…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 392 

AISD Comparison with Local Peer Group Districts………………………………………………………… 393 

AISD Comparison with Urban Peer Group Districts………………………………………………………… 399 

AISD Comparison with the State of Texas…………………………………………………………………… 405 

Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST)……………………………………………………………………… 411 

Food Services………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 423 

Transportation………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 426 

Risk Management…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 427 

Academic Programs……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 428 

Accountability Indicators…………………………………………………………………………………………… 433 

Academic Assessment and Accountability………………………………………………………………………… 434 

Accomplishments…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 445 

Demographical and Statistical……………………………………………………………………………………… 466 

Glossary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 471


List of Tables 

Introduction 

Table 1 Student Ethnicity Percentages for Austin ISD……………………………………….……… 6 

Table 2 2011 TAKS and 2012 STAAR (TAKS Equivalent) Results Grade 3-8 by Group………… 10 

Table 3 2012 STAAR EOC Results for Texas Big-8 School Districts……………………………… 11 

Table 4 2012 STAAR Average Percentage of Questions Answered Correctly Grades 3-8……… 11 

Table 5 2011-2012 Preliminary AYP for Texas Big-8 School Districts……………………………… 12 

Table 6 2010-2012 SAT Results - District Averages by Group……………………………………… 13 

Table 7 2010-2012 ACT Results - District Averages by Group……………………………………… 13 

Table 8 2011 Operating Expenditures per Pupil……………………………………………………. 15 

Table 9 2011 Percent of fourth graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP mathematics……… 16 

Table 10 2011 Percent of eight graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP mathematics………… 17 

Table 11 2011 Percent of fourth graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP reading……………… 18 

Table 12 2011 Percent of eight graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP reading……………… 18 

Table 13 General Fund - Fund Balance (In Millions)………………………………………………….. 20 

Table 14 Milestones of the Budget Process…………………………………………………………… 22 

Table 15 Board Goals, Strategies to Achieve Goals and Budget Parameters……………………… 23 

Table 16 Savings from Cuts, Cost Avoidance and Revenue Measures……………………………… 28 

Table 17 Major Funds……………………………………………………………………………………… 32 

Table 18 Major Funds - Pie Chart………………………………………………………………………… 33 

Table 19 General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function and Changes in 

Fund Balance…………………………………………………………………………………… 34 

Table 20 Expenditure Budget for Three Primary Funds and Recapture……………………………… 35 

Table 21 Recapture Payments Compared to General Fund Expenditure Budget…………………… 36 

Table 22 Funding Sources FY2013 with Comparative Data from Prior Year…………………….. 38 

Table 23 General Fund Revenue Sources……………………………………………………………… 38 

Table 24 Changes in General Fund Revenues and Expenditures from FY2012 to FY2013……… 43 

Table 25 FY2013 Adopted Budget & Tax Rate for M&O and I&S…………………………………. 46 

Table 26 Tax Rate History……………………………………………………………………………….. 47 

Table 27 Analysis of Tax Burden………………………………………………………………………… 48 

Table 28 FY2012 Central Texas School District Property Tax Rates………………………………… 49 

Table 29 Net Taxable Value Projection…………………………………………………………………… 50 

Table 30 Total Tax Levy…………………………………………………………………………………… 51 

Table 31 Schedule for Certification of the Appraisal Roll……………………………………………… 52 

Table 32 FY2013 Adopted Operation Budget Dollars by Functional Area…………………………… 53 

Table 33 General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function and Changes in 

Fund Balance…………………………………………………………………………………… 55 

Table 34 Food Service Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in 

Fund Balance…………………………………………………………………………………… 57 

Table 35 Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in 

Fund Balance…………………………………………………………………………………… 59 

Table 36 2008 Bond Initiative Capital Projects…………………………………………………………… 60 

Table 37 Capital Projects…………………………………………………………………………………… 61 

Table 38 Grant Funding Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Function…………………… 63 

Table 39 Student Enrollment History and Projections…………………………………………………… 66 

Table 40 Five-Year Staffing History……………………………………………………………………… 67 

Table 41 Budget Comparison Excluding Chapter 41 by Percent (General Fund)…………………… 68 

Table 42 Future Budget Projections for General Fund………………………………………………… 70



Organization 

Table 43 Enrollment History……………………………………………………………………………… 75 

Table 44 Student Ethnicity Percentages of Austin ISD……………………………...………………… 76 

Table 45 The Code Structure…..…..…………………………..………………………………………… 92 

Table 46 Function/Program Intent Codes Matrix…...……………………………………………………103 

Table 47 Current Bond Authorization Status…………………………………………………………… 105 

Table 48 General Fund-Fund Balance (In Millions)………………………………………………………107 

Table 49 Budget Development Process………………………………………………………………… 113 

Financial 

Table 50 All Governmental Funds Combined Statement of Revenue and Expenditures……………119 

Table 51 All Governmental Funds Combined Statement of Revenue and Expenditures 

FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years by Major Object……………………………120 

Table 52 Revenue and Expenditure Budget for FY2013……………………………………….……… 126 

Table 53 FY2013 Expenditure Budget for Three Primary Funds and Recapture…………………… 127 

Table 54 Recapture Payments Compared to General Fund Expenditure Budget……………………128 

Table 55 FY2013 State Funding Sources…………………………………………………………………129 

Table 56 FY2013 Revenue Sources………………………………………………………………………129 

Table 57 Historical Comparison of Revenue Sources……………………………………………………130 

Table 58 FY2013 Adopted Budget by Functional Area (General Fund)……………………….. 131 

Table 59 FY2013 Adopted Budget by Functional Area (General Fund)……………………….. 132 

Table 60 FY2013 General Fund Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Function………… 135 

Table 61 General Fund Statement of Revenue and Expenditures 

FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years by Major Object……………………………137 

Table 62 Adopted Budget Comparison With and Without Chapter 41 …………...……….………… 141 

Table 63 Adopted Budget Comparison With and Without Chapter 41Pie Chart …………...……… 141 

Table 64 General Fund Major Changes………...……….……….…..……………………………………142 

Table 65 Tax Ratification Election Projected Revenue Scenarios…………………………………… 145 

Table 66 General Fund Operating Expenditures per Student………………………………………… 148 

Table 67 Food Service Funds Statement of Revenue and Expenditures…...…..……………………339 

Table 68 Food Service School and Lunch Program…………………...……………………………… 340 

Table 69 Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenue and Expenditures…...…..………………………342 

Table 70 Combined Debt Service Schedule………………………………………………………………343 

Table 71 Combined Debt Service Timeline………………………………………………………………344 

Table 72 Bonded Debt Facts and Legal Debt Margin…………...………………………………………345 

Table 73 2008 Bond Initiative Capital Projects……………………………………………………. 347 

Table 74 2008 Bond Proposition Detail……………………………………………………………………348 

Table 75 Capital Projects……………………………………………………………………………………349 

Table 76 Capital Projects Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in 

Fund Balance…………………………………………………………………………………… 350 

Table 77 Projected Construction Timeline……………………………………………………………… 351 

Table 78 Capital Projects Impact on General Fund……………………………………………………. 356 

Table 79 Grant Funding from Federal Sources………………………………………………………… 359 

Table 80 Proprietary Funds - Print Shop Reproduction…………………………………………………364 

Table 81 Proprietary Funds - Worker's Compensation Fund……………………………………………365 

Table 82 Proprietary Funds - Health Insurance Fund…………………………………………………. 365 

Table 83 Proprietary Funds - Laundry Service……………………………………………………………366 

Table 84 Proprietary Funds - District Police………………………………………………………………366



Information 

Table 85 Net Taxable Value Summary……………………………………………………………………368 

Table 86 Net Taxable Value History and Projections…………………………………………………. 369 

Table 87 Appraised and Net Taxable Value Comparison………………………………………………370 

Table 88 Total Tax Levy……………………………………………………………………………………371 

Table 89 Tax Rate History………………………………………………………………………………… 372 

Table 90 FY2013 Central Texas School District Property Tax Rates……………………………. 373 

Table 91 Analysis of Tax Burden………………………………………………………………………… 374 

Table 92 Property Tax Levies and Collections…………………………………………………………. 375 

Table 93 2012 Top Ten Taxpayers…………………………………………………………………….. 375 

Table 94 Student Enrollment and Projections…………………………………………………………. 376 

Table 95 Student Enrollment Five Year History by Campus…………………………………………. 377 

Table 96 District Fact Sheet…………………………………………………………………………… 381 

Table 97 Staffing History…………………………………………………………………………………. 382 

Table 98 Teacher by Highest Degree Held - AISD Comparison to State………………………….. 383 

Table 99 Teacher by Years of Experience - AISD Comparison to State………………………….. 384 

Table 100 Projection of Revenue, Expenditures, and Fund Balance for General Fund………………386 

Table 101 Projection of Revenue, Expenditures, and Fund Balance for Debt Service and 

Food Service Funds………………………………………………………………………………387 

Table 102 Schedule of Buildings and Square Footage…………………………………………………. 388 

Table 103 Local Peer Group Comparison with Student Groups…………………………………………394 

Table 104 Local Peer Group Comparison of Staffing…………………………………………………… 395 

Table 105 Local Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code…… 396 

Table 106 Local Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Function……………………397 

Table 107 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Student Groups………………………………………… 400 

Table 108 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Staffing……………………………………………………401 

Table 109 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code……402 

Table 110 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Function………………… 403 

Table 111 Benchmark Data Comparison to State………………………………………………………. 406 

Table 112 Austin ISD Staffing Comparison to State Staffing…………………………………………… 407 

Table 113 Student Ratio Comparison…………………… `` 408 

Table 114 Teacher Ratio Comparison………………………………………………………………………408 

Table 115 Per Student Expenditure Ratio Austin ISD………………………………………………….. 409 

Table 116 Per Student Expenditure Ratio State of Texas……………………………………………… 409 

Table 117 Instruction Percentage Comparison……………………………………………………………410 

Table 118 FAST District Ratings with Fiscal Peers……………………………………………………… 412 

Table 119 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison with Student Groups…………………………………413 

Table 120 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Staffing…………………………………………… 415 

Table 121 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Program ………… 417 

Table 122 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Operating Expenditures by Function……………419 

Table 123 Average Daily Food Services Lunch Participation……………………………………………423 

Table 124 Average Daily Food Services BreakfastParticipation…………………………………………423 

Table 125 Food Service Productivity……………………………………………………………………… 424 

Table 126 District Meal Pricing Comparison……………………………………………………………… 425 

Table 127 Histrical and Current District Meal Lunch and Breakfast Pricing……………………………425 

Table 128 Transportation Historical and Budgeted Information…………………………………………426



Information (continued) 

Table 129 SAT Performance…………………………………………………………………………………439 

Table 130 SAT Performance by Ethnicity………………………………………………………………… 440 

Table 131 SAT Campus, District, State, & National Average Scores……………………………………441 

Table 132 TAKS Comparison by Student Group………………………………………………………… 442 

Table 133 2012 STAAR EOC Preliminary Results for Texas Big 8 School Districts………………… 443 

Table 134 AYP Preliminary Results………………………………………………………………………. 444 

Table 135 Population Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….. 466 

Table 136 Economic and Growth Indicators……………………………………………………………… 467 

Table 137 Employment by Industry in the Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area……………………… 468 

Table 138 Top Ten Employers in Austin……………………………………………………………………468 

Table 139 Urban and National Comparison of Unemployment Rate……………………………………469

Association of School Business Officials International ® 

This Meritorious Budget Award is presented to 


For excellence in the preparation and issuance 

of its school system budget 

for the Fiscal Year 2011-2012. 

The budget is judged to conform 

to the principles and standards of the 

ASBO International ® Meritorious Budget Awards 

Program. 

President 

Executive Director

The Austin Independent School District 

Mission Statement 

In partnership with parents and our community, 

Austin ISD exists to provide a comprehensive 

educational experience that is high quality, 

challenging, and inspires all students to make 

a positive contribution to society.



Introduction



Administrative Office 

1111 West Sixth Street 

Austin, Texas 78703 

Board of Trustees 

Mark Williams President District 5 

Vincent Torres Vice President District 4 

Lori Moya Secretary District 6 

Tamala Barksdale Member At Large, Position 9 

Cheryl Bradley Member District 1 

Christine Brister Member District 3 

Sam Guzman Member District 2 

Annette LoVoi Member At Large, Position 8 

Robert Schneider Member District 7 

Administrative Officials 

Meria Carstarphen, Ed.D., Superintendent 

Mel Waxler 

Pauline Dow 

Paul Cruz 

William Caritj 

Michael Houser 

Lawrence Fryer 

Nicole Conley-Abram 

Chief of Staff 

Chief Academic Officer 

Chief Schools Officer 

Chief Performance Officer 

Chief Human Capital Officer 

Chief Operations Officer 

Chief Financial Officer 

Officials Issuing Report 

Nicole Conley-Abram, Chief Financial Officer 

Leo Lopez, Executive Director of Finance 

Theresa Wilde, Director, Budget Office 

AISD FY2013 OFFICIAL BUDGET PLAN . 

September 

2012 1

Executive Summary 

The Austin Independent School District (AISD) is pleased to present the FY2013 Adopted Budget and 

financial plan. This budget has been prepared in accordance with state regulations and local policies 

covering the 12 month period from September 1, 2012 through August 31, 2013. 

This will be the third year of a five-year budget plan that began during FY2010. Our strategy has been to 

reduce the budget, stabilize our resources and create a structure that allows us to do a better job of 

controlling our finances and our destiny as a district. AISD is in a better position to plan for such 

strategic goals as a staff compensation increase and other priorities outlined in the district’s five-year 

Strategic Plan. 

The district has worked aggressively to build up reserves during FY2012, as it has done for the past few 

years, so that AISD is positioned to absorb the additional legislative formula state aid decreases in 

FY2013. Our multi-year financial planning has allowed the district to continue its practice of taking 

preemptive actions to address budget challenges, now and in the future. As a result, we are currently in 

a position where we do not anticipate having to reduce staff or make other significant budget reductions 

for FY2013. 

The result of a strategy that was based on identifying efficiencies, implementing spending controls, 

maximizing available grants and increasing our average daily attendance, our district’s fund balance 

reserves now exceed the 14 percent required by the Board’s policy, but is projected to be slightly under 

what the Texas Education Agency recommends school districts maintain to cover fall collection deficits 

and other dollars needed to cover cash flow. We will continue to protect fund balance reserves so they 

are sufficient to cover these delayed costs and future unanticipated needs. 

Last year’s staff cuts were difficult and have created challenges. At the campus level, even with the 

personnel reductions, principals and staff members are meeting higher performance expectations. 

District staff members are doing everything possible to ensure that our students do not bear the brunt of 

recent budget cuts. For everyone, the challenges have increased, and we are all doing more with less. 

In the future, as now, retaining high-quality staff members will continue to be one of our biggest 

challenges. The time has come to consider salary increases for all of our staff members. Within the next 

year or two, the district is likely to seek the support of voters for a tax ratification election to fund a salary 

increase for district employees. 

This document is the culmination of an intensive budgeting process involving input from the Board of 

Trustees, senior cabinet, principals, central office staff, department heads, the Budget and Finance 

Advisory Committee (BFAC), the District Advisory Council (DAC), parents and citizens. During this 

process, staff used budgetary discipline to support the continuation of efficient and successful programs, 

while implementing new initiatives to expedite the achievement of district-wide goals using available 

resources. In fiscal terms, this is the action plan for both the instructional and ancillary processes 

necessary for successful operation of the district. 


September 

2012 2

Core Values 

Austin ISD is a school-minded community committed to the following core values: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Focus on Children 

Excellence 

Integrity 

Equity 

Respect 

Health and Safety 

Strategic Values 

In December 2009, the Board of Trustees approved the AISD Strategic Plan for FY2010-2015. With 

limited resources, AISD must remain focused on the goals and strategies that will best prepare all 

students for college, career and life in a globally competitive environment. 

As a district, we hold ourselves accountable for meeting the needs of all of our students. AISD’s allocation 

of resources is designed to maximize student achievement. Focusing resources to accomplish this end is 

our highest priority. Throughout the district, campus leadership is actively involved in making focused 

requests that target dollars to improve student performance. 

"We all have a stake in public education. 

It is the most important investment we can 

make as a community for the future health 

and prosperity of our city, our state and our 

nation. As a community, we need to 

determine the quality of education we 

demand for our kids. We need to ask 

ourselves whether we have the courage 

and community to adequately invest in our 

schools and in our children’s education 

for the future." 

Meria J. Carstarphen, Ed.D., 

Superintendent – Austin ISD 


September 

2012 3

Strategic Plan Framework 

Mission 

WHAT WE DO 


AISD exists to provide a comprehensive 


challenging, and inspires all students to 

make a positive contribution to society. 

Vision 

WHERE WE WANT TO BE 

AISD will be nationally recognized as an 

outstanding school district, instilling a passion 

for life-long learning in all students. 

Values 

WHAT WE BELIEVE IN 


Excellence 

Integrity 

Equity 

Respect 


Goals 

WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH 

 

 

 

 

All students will perform at or above grade 

level. 

Achievement gaps among all student 

groups will be eliminated. 

All students will graduate ready for college, 

career and life in a globally competitive 

economy. 

All schools will meet or exceed state 

accountability standards, and the district 

will meet federal standards and exceed 

state standards. 

Strategies 

HOW WE WILL ACHIEVE OUR GOALS 

 

 

 

 

Provide a high-quality, well-rounded 

educational experience to all students that is 

rigorous, culturally relevant, healthful and 

engaging. 

Build strong relationships with students, 

families, and the community to increase trust 

and shared responsibility. 

Ensure that every classroom has a highquality, 

effective educator, supported by 

high-quality, effective administrators and 

support staff. 

Align resources to accomplish priorities 

within a balanced budget. 

Measurable Outcomes 

HOW WE WILL CHECK 

PROGRESS ON OUR GOALS 

1. Results of standardized testing 

2. Achievement gaps among student groups 

3. Graduation rates 

4. College readiness 

5. Postsecondary enrollment 

6. Enrollment in Advanced Placement (AP) 

courses 

7. Performance in AP courses 

8. Additional measures related to readiness for 

college, career, and life in a globally 

competitive economy 

9. District and accountability ratings 

10. Attendance rates 

11. Four-year completion rates 

12. Annual dropout rates 

AISD FY2013 OFFICIAL BUDGET PLAN . September 2012 4

Facts about Austin Independent School District 

Austin ISD is the fifth largest school district in Texas and the 37th largest district in the United States. It 

serves the City of Austin, Texas, which has a population of approximately 790,390 according to the latest 

decennial 2010 U.S. Census Bureau statistics. The Census Bureau estimates the Austin Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA) has a population of 1,716,289 and projects this number to increase by 33.9 

percent to 2,292,737 by 2020. As the seat of government for the State of Texas, Austin has become a 

vibrant, dynamic business, government and educational center. Founded in 1839 as the tiny village of 

Waterloo, the city has become one of the fastest growing cities in the United States. Austin is also a 

highly touted educational center, hosting the respected University of Texas, St. Edwards University and a 

variety of other higher education institutions. 

AISD is an independent, public educational agency operating under the applicable laws and regulations in 

the State of Texas. The district’s organizational hierarchy begins with the students, parents and 

community members who elect a nine-member Board of Trustees to autonomously govern the district. 

The Board of Trustees employs the superintendent, who is the Chief Executive Officer, to manage the 

day-to-day operations of the district. Under the superintendent are seven chiefs, who oversee various 

areas of the district’s operations, including academics, campus operations, human resources, facilities 

and system management, finance, performance evaluation and accountability. The Texas Education 

Agency provides the district’s education accreditation. 



Austin ISD Board of Trustees 

(from left) Robert Schneider, District 7; Tamala Barksdale, At Large 9; Lori Moya, SECRETARY, District 6; 

Cheryl Bradley, District 1; Mark Williams, PRESIDENT, District 5; Vincent M. Torres, VICE PRESIDENT, District 4; 

Christine Brister, District 3; Annette LoVoi, At Large 8; Sam Guzmán, District 2. 


September 

2012 5

This district will serve a community with a projected student enrollment of 87,336 students for the FY2013 

school year. Austin ISD operates 84 elementary schools, 18 middle schools, 17 high schools and 10 

special campuses/alternative centers. 

The district’s population is diverse. The population is expected to grow as the City of Austin attracts talent 

from around the nation and the world in technology, higher education, and research and development 

industries. 

Table 1 


Student Ethnicity Percentages for Austin ISD 

Ethnicity FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

African American 11.7% 11.3% 9.5% 9.1% 

Asian/Pacific Islanders 3.4% 3.7% 3.3% 3.3% 

Hispanic 58.8% 58.9% 60.3% 60.5% 

Native American 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 

White 25.8% 25.8% 24.3% 24.4% 

Other 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 2.4% 

Hispanic 

60.5% 

Native 

American 

0.3% 

African 

American 

9.1% 

White 

24.4% 

Asian/Pacific 

Islanders 

3.3% 

Other 

2.4% 

Preliminary teacher staffing formulas for FY2013 will remain unchanged from the FY2012 school year. 

Elementary class size caps will remain as follows: PK (20:1), K-4 (22:1), and 5-6 (30:1). Secondary class 

sizes are targeted at an approximate level of 29 per class, based on teaching a 6 out of 8 schedule. 

There will be 178 instructional days in the FY2013 school year. This represents an increase of three 

student instructional days over the FY2012 school year. Teachers will have nine days for professional 

development and planning/preparation. The school calendar shows the beginning and ending of the 

school year, as well as school holidays and professional development/planning days. The district has sixweek 

and nine-week grading periods. To prepare the school calendar, the administration works with a 

task force made up of both community representatives and staff members. The Board of Trustees 

approves the final school calendar. 


September 

2012 6

Academic Programs 

In FY2013, the district will serve an estimated 87,336 students at 119 regular campuses and 10 special 

campuses. In every classroom, the focus every day is on teaching and learning. Through high standards 

that ensure academic rigor in a thinking curriculum, students’ learning opportunities are grounded in the 

skills they will need for success in the 21 st Century. 

 

 

 

 

Elementary School (84 schools with a projected enrollment of 49,269 students in prekindergarten-grade 

5): Most schools offer kindergarten through fifth grade, although some include 

pre-kindergarten and/or sixth grade. The elementary instructional program includes a core 

curriculum of Reading, Writing, Mathematics, Science and Social Studies. It also provides for 

student intervention as needed. The enrichment curriculum offers Health, Physical Education and 

Fine Arts. The district emphasizes that each child must have a consistent challenging curriculum 

that surpasses state requirements. Gifted and Talented, Bilingual Education, English as a Second 

Language, and Special Education programs are available to meet specific needs. AISD will open 

its first in-district charter, college preparatory school, IDEA Allan, during FY2013. The Uphaus 

Early Childhood Center also will open during FY2013. 

Middle School (18 schools with a projected enrollment of 16,294 students in grades 6-8): The 

middle school foundation and enrichment courses develop concepts and skills introduced in 

elementary school. Career and Technology Education courses are available to expose students 

to a variety of career possibilities. English as a Second Language, Advanced Academics and 

Special Education programs are available to meet specific needs. 

High School (17 schools with a projected enrollment of 21,271 students in grades 9-12): High 

schools offer students more advanced education in English, Language Arts, Mathematics, Social 

Studies and Science. Students also must take courses in Health and physical education and at 

least one year of a language other than English. A wide variety of elective courses include 

additional foreign-language study and fine arts electives such as Choral Music, Band, Orchestra, 

Art, Dance, and Theater Arts. Career and Technology Education offers courses to prepare 

students for careers in high demand. A magnet high school provides advanced academic 

programs for students. English as Second Language, Advanced Academics and Special 

Education programs are available to meet specific needs. 

Special Campuses (10 campuses with a projected enrollment of 502 students): Special 

campuses include the Leadership Academy, Phoenix Academy, Travis County Day School, the 

Travis County Juvenile Detention Center, the Austin State Hospital, Garza Independence High 

School, Rosedale and a redesigned Learning Support Center model for disciplinary placement. 


September 

2012 7

Academic Rating 

In response to recent legislative mandates, state accountability in Texas will be in transition during 

FY2012 and FY2013 as the TEA implements a new set of standardized tests, the State of Texas 

Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR), and develops an entirely new state accountability 

system. No new state ratings will be issued in FY2012, the first year of the STAAR assessments. 

However, under federal adequate yearly progress (AYP) accountability, campuses and districts will be 

evaluated in FY2012 and assigned a status of Meets AYP, Missed AYP or Not Evaluated. Federal AYP 

ratings will be based on TAKS results for grade 10, STAAR results for grades 3-8 at the Texas 

Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) proficiency level, and attendance/graduation rates. AYP 

ratings will be released in fall 2012. In FY2013, the first year of campus and district ratings under the new 

accountability system, the state will issue only two ratings: acceptable and unacceptable. Higher 

distinction designation rating levels for campuses and districts will be developed and assigned for the first 

time in FY2014. Austin ISD received an Academically Acceptable rating in FY2011, which is the most 

recent TEA Accountability Rating period. 

House Bill (HB) 3, enacted by the 81 st Legislature in 2009, made significant changes to the Texas 

Education Code. The focus of the new state accountability system will shift from meeting satisfactory 

requirements to meeting both satisfactory (Level II) and college-ready (Level III) standards on new 

STAAR assessments. One of the most important goals set forth for the new accountability system is for 

Texas to become one of the top ten states for graduating college-ready students by FY2020. 

Legislative mandates require that the following indicators must be used in determining ratings under the 

new state accountability system: 

STAAR grades 3-8 English 

STAAR grades 3-5 Spanish 

STAAR end-of-course (EOC) assessments including retests (Grade 11 TAKS performance must 

also be included in the FY2013 ratings) 

Dropout rates for grades 9-12 or district completion rates, and 

High school graduation rates 

STAAR assessment indicators must include evaluation of: 

Level II performance, and for students who did not meet the Level II standard, progress toward 

the Level II standard. 

Level III performance, and for students who did not meet the Level III standard, progress toward 

the Level III standard. 

(The use of progress measures is mandated by HB3, but will not be available for use until FY2014. 

Level III performance cannot be evaluated for acceptable/unacceptable ratings in FY2013.) 

Statute specifies that additional features will be available for the assessment and dropout/graduation 

indicators under the new accountability system to improve the rating outcome for campuses and 

districts. Two are required and one is optional. The additional features are: 

Required Improvement (RI) over the prior year (required), or 

Average performance over the last three years (required), or 

Performance on 85 percent of the measures meets the standard (optional). 


September 

2012 8

While these indicators are required components of the new state accountability system, the Texas 

Commissioner of Education has the authority to select the overall framework for the system design, to 

determine the number of rating levels and the labels associated with each level, and to determine to what 

extent state and federal AYP accountability systems are aligned. A range of options from a system of 

“separate indicators” to a “performance index” may be selected and still satisfy statutory requirements. 

The commissioner also has the option of developing separate indicators for elementary, middle, and high 

school grade spans or separate indicators for STAAR grades 3-8 and high school EOC results. In 

addition to the indicators listed above, the commissioner has the authority to include additional indicators 

in the accountability system and set their targets. 

During FY2012 and FY2013, Texas Education Agency staff will meet with two groups to discuss the 

design of the new state accountability system: 

Accountability Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) will consider complex technical issues 

related to accountability in order to develop recommendations that ensure that Texas achieves 

the goals of the accountability system for 2013 and beyond. Members are Texas public school 

educators from school districts and Education Service Centers who have detailed knowledge of 

assessment and accountability systems. 

Accountability Policy Advisory Committee (APAC) consists of educators representing 

campuses, school districts, and education service centers; legislative representatives; business 

and community leaders; representatives of higher education; and parents of children attending 

Texas public schools. The APAC will provide to the Commissioner of Education its responses to 

the ATAC proposals. 

These committees will consider complex technical issues related to the development of an integrated 

academic accountability system for Texas public schools and make recommendations to the 

Commissioner of Education. As recommendations from these committees become available, the public 

will have the opportunity to comment. The commissioner will release final accountability decisions for 

2013 and 2014 in March of each year. 

Academic Assessment and Accountability 

When measuring students’ academic performance, academic assessment and accountability go hand in 

hand. Historically, the focus has been on the percentage of students reaching the proficiency standard in 

various subject areas such as Reading, Mathematics, Writing, Social Studies, and Science and also the 

percentage of students meeting the more rigorous commended performance level. While passing 

standards have not yet been set for STAAR 3-8, preliminary assessment data on the performance of 

Austin ISD students indicate that there has been improvement when compared to prior year TAKS results 

for grades 3 through 8 and that Austin ISD students performed well on end of course exams relative to 

other Big-8 urban school districts. 


September 

2012 9

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) and the State of Texas Assessments of 

Academic Readiness (STAAR) TAKS Equivalent (Grades 3-8) – TAKS was the former comprehensive 

testing program for Texas public school students. The TAKS was replaced by STAAR in 2012. Since 

STAAR passing standards for grades 3 through 8 will not be set until December 2012, TEA 

commissioned a bridging study for the specific purpose of meeting the federal mandate to evaluate 

adequate yearly progress (AYP) in reading and mathematics. Results of the bridging study allow for 

comparisons between 2011 TAKS and 2012 STAAR. Overall, when compared to TAKS 2011, the percent 

meeting the TAKS equivalent standard increased for all groups in Writing and Social Studies, for all but 

one group in Math and Science, and for all but two groups in Reading/ELA. 

Table 2 


2011 TAKS and 2012 STAAR (TAKS Equivalent) Results - Grade 3-8 by Group 

Group 

2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 

All Students 85% 87% 83% 85% 92% 95% 79% 82% 92% 97% 

African American 79% 81% 72% 74% 88% 94% 65% 70% 87% 97% 

Hispanic 80% 83% 79% 82% 90% 94% 73% 77% 90% 96% 

White 97% 97% 95% 96% 98% 99% 95% 97% 98% 100% 

Econ. Dis. 79% 82% 77% 80% 89% 93% 70% 74% 89% 95% 

LEP 71% 75% 75% 78% 86% 90% 57% 62% 76% 91% 

Special Education 82% 82% 79% 79% 74% 87% 63% 62% 87% 90% 

Current yr incl STAAR/M/Alt, Grd 3‐8 

Prior yr incl TAKS/A/M/Alt/L, Grd 3‐8 fr 04/11 

Reading /ELA 

Math 

Writing Science Social Studies 

Percent Met Stnd Percent Met Stnd Percent Met Stnd Percent Met Stnd Percent Met Stnd 

STAAR End-of-Course assessments – With the introduction of STAAR, newly enrolled 9th graders, 

students who entered high school in fall 2011, were required to take the End-of-Course (EOC) 

assessment in each subject in which they are enrolled and for which an EOC assessment exists. The 

timeline for standard - setting activities differs for STAAR grades 3 through 8 and STAAR EOC because 

of the timing of available assessment data and different legislative requirements. For STAAR EOC, 

operational assessment data were available from the spring 2011 administrations. Therefore, 

performance standards were set in February 2012, prior to the spring administrations. 

Results for end of course (EOC) assessments taken by a typical 9th grade students; English I - Reading, 

English I - Writing, Algebra I, Biology, and World Geography; indicate that AISD led the Big- 8 urban 

school districts in meeting or exceeding the Level II (Phase-in 1) Standard in four subjects. According to 

these results, AISD led Big-8 districts in English I- Reading; English I- Writing; Algebra I and World 

Geography and ranked second in Biology. 


September 

2012 10

Table 3 

2012 STAAR EOC Preliminary Results for Texas Big-8 School Districts 

Percentage Meeting Level II (Phase-in 1) Standard 

Austin 

Corpus 

Christi 

Dallas 

El Paso 

Fort 

Worth 

Houston 

San 

Antonio 

Ysleta 

State 

English I Reading 69% 60% 56% 59% 55% 59% 53% 64% 68% 

English I Writing 54% 44% 43% 44% 37% 47% 34% 48% 55% 

Algebra I 84% 68% 75% 83% 78% 79% 68% 79% 83% 

Biology 84% 76% 83% 81% 81% 84% 78% 85% 87% 

World Geography 79% 72% 76% 75% 71% 73% 68% 79% 81% 

Source: Texas Assessment Management System - STAAR Assessment Summary Results 2012 

STAAR 3-8 Percent of Questions Answered Correctly - STAAR performance standards will not be 

set by TEA until December 2012 and passing rates for STAAR grades 3-8 will not be available until 

January of 2013; however, preliminary results for the STAAR 3-8 assessments indicate that AISD 

students met or exceeded state averages on the percent of questions answered correctly on 14 of the 

17 tests administered in English. 

Table 4 

Average Percent of Questions Answered Correctly AISD and State 

STAAR 2012 Grades 3-8 

Austin State 

Grade 3 

Reading 70% 65% 

Math 70% 65% 

Grade 4 


Math 71% 67% 

Writing 61% 59% 

Grade 5 


Math 70% 68% 

Science 75% 73% 

Grade 6 


Math 62% 60% 

Grade 7 


Math 56% 56% 

Writing 60% 61% 

Grade 8 


Math 50% 55% 

Science 63% 63% 

Social Studies 56% 56% 

State Raw Scores http://www.tea.state.tx.us/staar/rpt/sum/yr12/ 

downloaded 6/21/12 

Notes: Includes tests administered in English. Does not include 

modified or linguistically accomodated tests 


September 

2012 11

Federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Federal No Child Left Behind AYP standards for all student 

groups continue to increase. Last year, the U.S. Secretary of Education, told Congress that 82 percent of 

America's schools could fail to achieve AYP this year based on the higher passing standards. In 

February, the U.S. Department of Education invited each state education agency to submit a waiver from 

specific NCLB requirements. 

Amid the increasing standards, the Austin Independent School District is leading the Big-8 districts - 

comprised of large, urban school districts in Texas- with 57 percent of schools meeting the federallymandated 

AYP requirements. On September 6, 2012, the Texas Education Agency announced its intent 

to submit waiver requests to the U.S. Department of Education of certain provisions of the ESEA, as 

amended by P.L. 107-110 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, including waivers to sections on AYP 

calculations and performance targets. 

As a district, AISD did not meet mathematics and reading standards and will enter Stage 3 of the School 

Improvement Program. To address this rating, the district will allocate a percentage of its Title 1 funds for 

professional development in both of these subjects. 

Table 5 


Results for Texas Big-8 School Districts 

2011-2012 Preliminary AYP Results for All Campuses 

2012 

District AYP Status 

Met AYP 

2011 Campus Results 

Missed AYP 

Not 

Evaluated 

Total 

Campuses 

Met AYP 

2012 Campus Results 

Missed AYP 

Not 

Evaluated 

Total 

Campuses 

# % # % # % # # % # % # % # 

Austin ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 87 71% 31 25% 5 4% 123 70 57% 48 39% 4 3% 122 

Corpus Christi ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 41 68% 16 27% 3 5% 60 21 36% 34 59% 3 5% 58 

Dallas ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 140 61% 83 36% 7 3% 230 61 26% 158 67% 17 7% 236 

El Paso ISD Missed AYP: None 64 68% 24 26% 6 6% 94 53 56% 35 37% 6 6% 94 

Fort Worth ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 48 35% 76 55% 15 11% 139 41 29% 84 60% 16 11% 141 

Houston ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 211 71% 75 25% 11 4% 297 97 35% 169 61% 11 4% 277 

San Antonio ISD Missed AYP: Stage 3 50 51% 43 43% 6 6% 99 18 18% 73 74% 7 7% 98 

Ysleta ISD Missed AYP: None 43 70% 16 26% 2 3% 61 18 29% 41 66% 3 5% 62 

STATE Missed AYP 5,636 66% 1,807 21% 178 2% 8,526 3,773 44% 4,080 48% 676 8% 8,529 

Source: TEA District and Campus Listings on TEA website 

Note: "Met AYP" percentages include schools "not evaluated" in the denominator (reflecting TEA methodology). Austin ISD percentage "Met AYP" for 2012 increases to 59% when 

schools "not evaluated" are excluded from the calculation. 

For more information on TEA District and Campus Performance 

Data, please visit the following page on the district’s web site: 

http://archive.austinisd.org/inside/accountability/reviews 


September 

2012 12

SAT – This standardized college entrance examination evaluates a candidate’s critical thinking and 

problem solving skills which help measure their overall ability and potential to undertake the bachelor 

level study program. The subject test covers five general areas, including English, History and Social 

Studies, Mathematics, Science and Languages. The reasoning test assesses students reasoning in 

Mathematics, Verbal and Writing Skills. 

Ethnicity Group 

Table 6 


2010-2012 SAT Results – District Averages by Group 

2010 2011 2012 

No. Verbal Math Writing No. Verbal Math Writing No. Verbal Math Writing 

Native American 14 574 548 503 20 512 572 504 13 551 553 513 

Asian 133 543 617 545 150 514 585 512 147 538 602 518 

African American 278 407 429 395 324 408 427 390 314 416 439 397 

Mexican or Mexican 

American 

517 459 488 445 579 433 468 422 656 444 478 426 

Puerto Rican 16 504 533 493 13 467 475 426 14 509 530 530 

Other Hispanic, Latino, or 

Latin American 383 439 464 432 478 438 465 426 471 438 466 466 

White 949 565 589 549 1,107 571 591 554 1,062 571 590 590 

Other 31 489 511 466 50 492 526 482 61 523 533 533 

No Response 52 551 559 519 26 515 517 492 36 494 507 507 

Total 2,373 500 527 487 2,747 493 521 480 2,774 497 523 523 

ACT – This standardized college entrance examination assesses high school students’ general 

educational development and their ability to complete college-level work. The multiple-choice tests cover 

four skill areas: English, Mathematics, Reading and Science. The Writing Test, which is optional, 

measures skills in planning and writing short essays. A perfect ACT score is 36. In 2011, the AISD 

student average composite ACT score (21.3) exceeded the state (20.8) and national (21.1) averages. 

Ethnicity Group 

Table 7 


2011-2012 ACT Results – District Averages by Group 

2011 2012 

English Math Reading Science Composite English Math Reading Science Composite 

Native American * * * * * * * * * * 

Asian 22.7 26.7 23.0 23.7 24.1 24.1 27.1 25.2 25.0 25.5 

African American 16.0 17.9 16.2 16.9 16.5 14.9 17.8 16.8 17.3 16.8 

Hispanic 16.9 20.1 18.6 19.0 18.8 17.1 20.1 18.4 19.1 18.8 

White 24.8 26.0 25.3 24.5 25.3 24.3 25.4 25.2 24.3 24.9 

All Students 20.0 22.4 21.0 21.1 21.3 20.2 22.4 21.4 21.3 21.4 


September 

2012 13

AISD’s Continued Commitment to Students and Taxpayers 

The district is making progress in reducing achievement gaps between student groups, creating a 

college-bound culture, and boosting the expectations for and the achievement of English language 

learners and special education students. The district compares favorably to its peers in Texas and 

nationally in a number of important areas: 

 

 

AISD leads Texas school districts in the number of National Board Certified teachers for the 12th 

year in a row. In FY2011, AISD had 237 National Board Certified Teachers, up from 216 in 

FY2010. 

AISD’s fourth- and eighth-grade 

students continued to outperform 

their peers in large cities and 

other urban school districts on 

the 2011 National Assessment of 

Educational Progress (NAEP), 

also known as the “Nation’s 

Report Card.” 

NAEP results from FY2011 

showed that the percentage of 

fourth- and eighth-grade AISD 

students scoring at or above 

Basic in reading and 

mathematics was higher than the 

percentage of students scoring at 

or above Basic in these subjects 

in large city school districts, and 

in several other districts that 

participated in the Trial Urban 

District Assessment (TUDA). 

 

 

In FY2011, the average SAT score for AISD students was greater than the state average score 

and slightly lower than the national average score. Austin students’ average total score of 1494 

points included 493 in verbal (critical reading), 521 in mathematics and 480 in writing. AISD 

exceeded the state’s average by 48 points. The district's counterparts in Texas scored 479 in 

verbal, 502 in mathematics and 465 in writing, respectively, for a total average state score of 

1446 points. 

AISD students taking the ACT in FY2011 exceeded both the state and national overall average 

scores. The average composite ACT score (21.3) for AISD students increased in FY2011, while 

the state (20.8) and national average (21.1) composite scores remained the same. 


September 

2012 14

$10,000 

$9,000 

$8,000 

$9,493 

Table 8 


Operating Expenditures per Pupil FY2011 

$7,252 

$9,673 

$8,313 

$9,209 $9,064 

$8,182 

$9,159 

$7,000 

$6,000 

$5,000 

$4,000 

$3,000 

$2,000 

$1,000 

$0 

AUSTIN ISD CYPRESS DALLAS ISD EL PASO FORT HOUSTON NORTHSIDE SAN 

FAIRBANKS 

ISD WORTH ISD ISD ISD ANTONIO 

ISD 


Other Funds & Grants $1,893 $1,463 $2,309 $1,735 $2,297 $2,220 $1,424 $2,525 

General Fund $7,600 $5,789 $7,364 $6,578 $6,912 $6,844 $6,758 $6,634 

Our Student Investment When Compared to our Texas Urban Peers 

In FY2011, the most recent year for which comparable data are available, Austin spent $9,493 per pupil, 

which ranks second highest among urban school districts in Texas. Dallas, the highest, spent $9,673 per 

pupil and Fort Worth ISD, the third highest, spent $9,209 per pupil. Five of the eight urban peers 

illustrated in the following table had per pupil expenditures exceeding $9,000 per year. Austin ISD’s perpupil 

spending level reflects the district’s commitment to ensuring that its fast-growing, diverse student 

population graduates prepared to meet the competitive demands of a global economy. Also, Austin is one 

of the few school districts that are required by law to contribute to the Social Security Administration at a 

cost of $33 million annually, or $387 per pupil in FY2011. When the per pupil costs of social security are 

factored, Austin's spending ranks third, just behind Fort Worth. 

Due to significant budget reductions in FY2011, Austin ISD’s per-pupil expenditures decreased $116 from 

$9,609 in FY2010 to $9,493 in FY2011. 

How Austin Stacks Up Nationally 

While Austin’s per-pupil spending compares favorably among its statewide peers, the same is not the 

case nationally. Texas spends less per student on public education than most other states. According to 

FY2012 Quality Counts, an annual report card published by Education Week, Texas received a grade of 

“D+” for education spending. Further, the state received an “F” for student spending as it ranked 49th out 

of 50 states. 

The latest data from the FY2011 NAEP results demonstrate that Austin ISD outperformed most of the 

TUDA districts in both reading and mathematics in fourth and eighth grade. When comparing the seven 

TUDA districts with similar student economic disadvantage, AISD per-pupil expenditures are among the 

lowest. This suggests that AISD is accomplishing more with less. 


September 

2012 15

Mathematics 

Overall, Austin ISD’s FY2011 mathematics results demonstrate that the percentage of fourth- and eighthgraders 

scoring at or above Basic remains higher than the percentage of their peers scoring at or above 

Basic in most other TUDA districts and in large city school districts (LCs) — school districts located in 

cities with populations of 250,000 or more. 

The percentage of AISD fourth graders scoring at or above Basic (87 percent) in mathematics was 

significantly higher than that of their peers in 18 of the 20 other TUDA districts, LCs (74 percent) and 

national public schools (82 percent), and represents a significant increase from FY2007 (83 percent). In 

addition, fourth-grade economically disadvantaged students’ average scale scores in mathematics 

improved significantly from FY2007 (229) to FY2011 (235). Similarly, the percentage of fourth-grade 

Hispanic students scoring at or above Basic in mathematics (82 percent) was greater than that of their 

peers in LCs (71 percent), national public schools (72 percent) and 12 of the 20 other TUDA districts. 

Table 9 


Percent of fourth graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP mathematics, 2011 

The percentage 

of Austin ISD 

fourth-graders 

scoring at or 

above Basic was 

higher than the 

percentage of 

students scoring 

at or above Basic 

in large cities, 

national public 

schools, and 18 

other TUDA 

districts. 

The percentage of AISD eighth-graders scoring at or above Basic (74 percent) in mathematics was 

significantly higher than that of their peers in 17 of the 20 other TUDA districts and LCs (63 percent), and 

was similar to that of their peers in national public schools (72 percent). It also increased significantly from 

FY2005 (68 percent). Students in several subgroups outperformed their peers in mathematics in similar 

districts, with scores improving significantly since FY2005. The percentage of eighth-grade Hispanic 

students scoring at or above Basic (67 percent) in mathematics was higher than that of their peers in LCs 

(58 percent) and national public schools (60 percent), and represented a significant improvement from 

FY2005 (56 percent). Additionally, the percentages of economically disadvantaged (62 percent) and 

English language learner (ELL) students (39 percent) scoring at or above Basic in mathematics in AISD 

were higher than those of their peers in LCs (55 percent and 26 percent, respectively) and represented 

significant improvement from FY2005 (49 percent and 21 percent, respectively). 


September 

2012 16

Table 10 


Percent of eight graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP mathematics, 2011 



eight-graders 

scoring at or 



percentage of 



in large cities, 

national public 

schools, and 17 

other TUDA 

districts. 

Reading 

In FY2011, the percentage of AISD students in both grades scoring at or above Basic in reading was 

higher than that of their peers in most TUDA districts and LCs. Overall, the percentage of fourth-graders 

scoring at or above Basic in reading (68 percent) was significantly higher than that of their peers in 15 of 

the 20 other TUDA districts and LCs (555), and was similar to that of their peers in national public schools 

(66 percent). It also was significantly higher in FY2011 than in FY2005 (61 percent). In addition, the 

percentage of fourth-grade students identified as ELLs who scored at or above Basic in reading in 

FY2011 (40 percent) has improved significantly since FY2005 (26 percent). Also noteworthy, the 

percentage of Black students scoring at or above Basic in reading (62 percent) was higher than that of 

their peers in LCs (45 percent) and 11 of the 20 other TUDA districts. 

Among AISD’s eighth-graders, the percentage of students scoring at or above Basic in reading in FY2011 

(71 percent) was significantly higher than that of students in 15 of the 20 other TUDA districts and LCs 

(65 percent), but was not significantly different from that of their peers in national public schools (75 

percent). However, it represented a significant improvement from FY2005 (65 percent). From FY2005- 

2011, the percentage of White students scoring at or above Basic in reading has improved from 86 

percent to 94 percent, and was significantly higher in FY2011 than that of their peers in LCs (83 percent) 

and in national public schools (84 percent). Although the percentages of Hispanic (63 percent) and 

economically disadvantaged (58 percent) students scoring at or above Basic in reading were not 

significantly higher than those of their peers in LCs (Hispanic students: 60 percent, economically 

disadvantaged students: 59 percent) or national public schools (Hispanic students: 63 percent; 

economically disadvantaged students: 63 percent), Hispanic and economically disadvantaged students 

have shown significant improvement in NAEP reading since FY2005 (Hispanic: 52 percent; economically 

disadvantaged students: 49 percent). 


September 

2012 17

Table 11 


Percent of fourth graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP reading, 2011 



fourth-graders 

scoring at or 



percentage of 



in large cities and 

15 other TUDA 

districts. 

Table 12 


Percent of eighth graders scoring at or above Basic on NAEP reading, 2011 



eighth-graders 

scoring at or 



percentage of 



in large cities and 

15 other TUDA 

districts. 


September 

2012 18

Financial Accountability 

Despite budget constraints in recent years, AISD continues to use sound fiscal management practices, 

and prudently allocates its resources. Budgets have been developed and implemented with a focus on 

students and their needs. The district’s efforts at fiscal responsibility have helped produce the following 

results: 

The second lowest overall property tax rates in Central Texas for school districts 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aaa debt rating from Moody’s Investors Service, AA+ from Standard & Poor’s, and AA from Fitch 

Ratings, which are among the highest ratings a Texas public school district can earn from these 

agencies. This has resulted in millions of dollars of savings for the district’s bond program and 

Austin taxpayers. 

A preliminary FY2012 School FIRST (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas) rating of 

Superior Achievement for the ninth consecutive year. 

The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts awarded AISD with a Gold Leadership Circle Award 

for budget transparency, three years in a row. Gold is the highest level achievable and requires 

multiple financial documents and a web page dedicated to financial transparency. 

The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation Award 

for nine years in a row. 

The GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the second year in 

a row. 

The Association of School Business Officials International (ASBO) Meritorious Budget Award for 

excellence in the preparation and issuance of its school system budget for two years in a row. 

The ASBO Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting. This was the first year the district 

applied for the award. 

Number-one ranked school district in the nation for total amount of renewable energy purchased. 

Eighth largest purchaser of “green power” among all U.S. government entities. 

A Two-Star rating or higher from the Austin Energy Green Building Program for new schools, 

classroom additions and major renovations under the 2004 and 2008 bond programs. 

Strong Fund Balance 

Fund balance is the net difference between the assets and liabilities of a fund. In much the same way as 

a homeowner maintains a savings account for unexpected emergencies, having a healthy fund balance 

enables the district to cover operating costs during low cash periods. Further, the district saves millions of 

dollars as a result of securing lower interest rates through strong bond ratings. Ensuring an adequate 

reserve level is essential to maintaining high bond ratings and supporting unplanned needs and 

emergencies. The following table provides a ten-year history of the district’s reserve levels. AISD will 

continue to maintain a prudent reserve of at least 14 percent of expenditures to ensure sound fiscal 

health. Beginning in FY2012, the district implemented the new requirement from GASB 54 to divide the 

fund balances into five different categories, including non-spendable, restricted, committed, assigned and 

unassigned. 


September 

2012 19

Millions 

$92 

$81 

$82 

$145 

$152 

$146 

$172 

$219 

$248 

$220 

The projected $184.6 million unassigned general fund balance is above the required policy of 14 percent 

but below slightly below the 2.5 months operating measure the state sets for optimal levels by $11.3 

million. The district had $148.3 million in reserves in FY2010 when AISD first became triple-A rated. This 

excellent rating enables the district to achieve a substantial savings on debt interest. The administration 

believes the FY2013 planned draw down will not impact the district’s credit rating as long as the district 

has a multi-year financial plan. 

300 

Table 13 


General Fund - Fund Balance (In Millions) 

For a Period from FY2004 through FY2013 

250 

200 

150 

$120.6 

$129.9 $121.0 

$148.3 

$179.6 

$199.1 

$184.6 

100 

$66.5 $60.7 $57.9 

50 

0 

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 

Total General Fund Fund Balance 

Unassigned General Fund Fund Balance 

14.0% Requirement Optimal Cash Flow for 2.5 Months 

Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) 

The Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19,§109.1001, states that the purpose of the financial 

accountability rating system is to ensure that school districts are held accountable for the quality of their 

financial management practices and achieve improved performance in the management of their financial 

resources. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to manage their financial 

resources better in order to provide the maximum possible allocation for direct instructional purposes. The 

system will also disclose the quality of local management and decision-making processes that impact the 

allocation of financial resources in Texas public schools. An evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of 

the system should disclose a measurable improvement in the quality of Texas public schools' financial 

decision-making processes. Since the inception of the FIRST rating system, the district has been rated 

Superior Achievement. This is the highest among five ratings: Superior Achievement, Above Standard 

Achievement, Standard Achievement, Substandard Achievement and Suspended. 


September 

2012 20

Budget Policies and Development Procedures 

The district is committed to increasing the level of transparency that surrounds a complex budget 

process. The Strategic Plan, which is the product of a genuine consensus-building process, and 

embodies the vision of the community, drives the annual budget process. The Board has established a 

policy that requires the district to maintain a minimum of 14 percent of operating expenditures in its 

general fund balance, which is a driving factor in the budgeting process. 

Developing the budget is an ongoing, annual, cyclical process. The Board of Trustees adopts the budget 

parameters annually in September and approves the budget calendar in October. In November, the 

Board reviews assumptions staffing formulas, enrollment projections, staffing guidelines and fund balance 

condition; determines strategic plan priorities; and takes action on the Annual Academic Facilities Master 

Plan Framework. In December, a multi-year financial forecast is presented, and the Board takes action on 

the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations (AAFRs). 

The Superintendent established the Budget and Finance Advisory Committee (BFAC) to provide 

guidance and counsel on matters of budget and finance. The BFAC meets regularly, working alongside 

staff and others to develop tools and methodologies on how to best improve the district’s budgeting 

process. The administration has been responsive to BFAC’s recommendations for greater cohesion and 

clarity. The district’s budget development has become an integrated process that aligns resource 

allocation with goals and priorities established through the development of a well-defined curriculum, and 

a well-conceived and executed strategic planning process. 

In February, the Superintendent presents the Preliminary Budget to the Board of Trustees, the public and 

the media. The Preliminary Budget provides a first glance of the investment plan for the upcoming school 

year. It evolves as the budget process advances and presents opportunities for input from key 

stakeholders including parents, students, citizens and staff. In March and April, the district holds 

interactive meetings with the community and staff regarding the Preliminary Budget so additional input 

can be incorporated before the numbers are finalized. 

In April, the Board discusses the Preliminary Budget and tax rate. After community, staff and Board 

feedback is incorporated, the Superintendent presents the Revised Budget to the Board. The district then 

conducts a public hearing on the Revised Budget. 

In July, the Travis Central Appraisal District (TCAD) certifies the local appraisal values. Local revenue 

from property taxes comprises more than 80 percent of total revenue. A small percentage change in 

TCAD appraisal value estimates can create a material change in the amount of revenue AISD expects to 

receive. The district incorporates the certified appraisal values and any other updated estimates, thus 

creating the Recommended Budget. 

In June, the Superintendent presents the Recommended Expenditure Budget to the Board, public, and 

media. The Board conducts a public hearing on the proposed budget and tax rate and then adopts the 

budget and tax rate. For FY2013, the Board of Trustees adopted the FY2013 Governmental Funds 

Budget and FY2013 tax rate on August 28, 2012. 


September 

2012 21

Table 14 


Milestones of the Budget Process 

Sept 2011 Board Budget Parameters Adopted April 2012 Community Conversation on 

the Preliminary Budget 

Oct 2011 Board Approves FY2013 Budget 

Calendar 

Staff Conversation on 


Nov 2011 Board Reviews Assumptions, 

Staffing Formulas, Enrollment 

Board Discussion on Preliminary 

Projections, Staffing Guidelines 

FY2013 Budget and Rate 

and Fund Balance Condition 

Board Determines Strategic Plan 

Priorities 

Superintendent presents the 

Revised FY2013 Budget based 

on Community & Board Feedback 

Board Action on Facilities Master 

Plan Framework 

Public Hearing on FY2013 

Revised Budget 

Dec 2011 Revised Financial Forecast for May 2012 Travis Central Appraisal District 

FY2013-2015 

provides Preliminary Appraisal 

Values 

Board Action on Annual Facilities 

Recommendations June 2012 Superintendent presents the 

Recommended FY2013 to the 

Jan 2012 Budget Office Compiles Budget Board, Public and Media 

Feb 2012 Superintendent presents the Board Conducts Public Hearing 

Preliminary FY2013 to the Board, 

on FY2013 Recommended Budget 

Public and Media 

Board Approval of FY2013 

Mar 2012 Community Conversation on Recommended Expenditure Budget 


July 2012 Travis Central Appraisal District 

Certifies Appraisal Values 

Aug 2012 

Board Conducts Public Hearing 

on Proposed Budget and Tax Rate 

Board Adopts the Budget and 

Tax Rate 

Texas Education Code, sections 44.002-44.006 establish the legal basis for school district budget 

development. The district’s budget must be prepared by a date set by the State Board of Education, 

which is currently August 20, and adopted by August 31. A public hearing for the budget and proposed 

tax rate must occur before the Board adopts the budget. The district’s budget must be legally adopted 

before the tax rate is adopted. As discussed in the preceding paragraphs, this budget document meets 

those standards. 


September 

2012 22

District 

Goals 

Goal # 1: 

All students will 

perform at or 

above grade 

level. 

Goal # 2: 

Achievement 

gaps among all 

student groups 

will be 

eliminated. 

Goal # 3: 


graduate ready 

for college, 

career, and life 

in a globally 

competitive 

economy. 

Goal # 4: 

All schools will 

meet or exceed 

state 

accountability 

standards, and 

the district will 

meet federal 

standards and 

exceed state 

standards. 

Table 15 


Board Goals, Strategies to Achieve Goals and Budget Parameters 

How To 

Achieve The Goals 

1. Provide a high quality, 

well-rounded 

educational experience 

to all students that is 

rigorous, culturally 

relevant, healthful, and 

engaging. 

2. Build strong 

relationships with 

students, families, and 

the community to 

increase trust and 

shared responsibility. 

3. Ensure that every 

classroom has a highquality, 

effective 

educator, supported by 

high-quality, effective 

administrators and 


4. Align resources to 

accomplish priorities 

within a balanced 

budget. 

Budget Parameters 

1. The Board seeks to maintain an unassigned fund balance 

consistent with district policy in an effort to (1) maintain a bond 

rating of Aaa or higher, (2) a “Superior” financial rating from the 

State and to (3) ensure a sufficient operating reserve to support 

operating costs for at least two months. 

2. The Board recognizes its fiduciary responsibility to adopt a balanced 

budget and will seek to do so by considering all cost savings and 

efficiency options. 

3. If projected expenditures exceed projected revenue and budget 

reductions become necessary, the district will first seek those 

options that are sustainable and will address structural imbalances 

on a multi-year basis. One-time solutions, including the use of fund 

balance reserves will be considered with caution and appropriately 

factored into out-year deficits. 

4. The district will continue to pursue additional revenue, costs savings 

and efficiencies; and will work to reduce investments into 

programming that hasn’t shown sufficient results. 

5. The budget will prioritize investments that are aligned with our 

Strategic Goals as outlined in the Strategic Plan: 

All students will perform at or above grade level. 

Achievement gaps among student groups will be 

eliminated. 

All students will graduate ready for college, career and life 

in a globally competitive economy. 

All schools will meet or exceed state accountability 

standards, and the district will meet federal standards and 

exceed state standards. 

6. We recognize the need to target resource investments into 

programming that supports achievement growth for all schools. 

Therefore any new budgetary investments will reflect the Strategic 

Priorities established by the Board. 

7. The performance results from the District’s Performance 

Management System which includes: the Districtwide Balanced 

Scorecard, Strategic Plan Monitoring tools, program evaluations, 

electronic dashboards, operational Key Performance Indicators 

(KPIs) and individual employee evaluations will be used to make 

budgetary decisions in an effort to establish a budget that is 

performance-driven and based on proven results. 

8. The budget process must be transparent and include sufficient 

opportunity for community engagement and feedback. 

9. The Board seeks to maintain competitive total compensation levels 

for all classes of employees and will consider such 

recommendations as long as they are sustainable. 

10. Budgeted assumptions for staffing ratios must meet State standards 

unless a waiver is sought from the State. 

11. The budget should be developed in a multi-year framework 

(minimum three years) to account for out-year implications of 

budget proposals and revenue estimates. 


September 

2012 23

Board Priorities for FY2013 

College, Career, Life Readiness 

Financial Structure & Basis for Accounting 

The district maintains more than 100 funds to account for its operations and special programs. Each fund 

varies in purpose. All funds are accounted for on a district-level basis. 

The fund accounting system defines each fund by fiscal period and a self-balancing set of accounts 

including assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenue and expenditures. There are four major fund groups. The 

Governmental Funds includes the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Debt Service Funds and 

Capital Projects Funds. Other funds maintained by the district include Internal Service Funds and 

Fiduciary Funds. 

Formal budgetary accounting is employed for all required Governmental Fund Types, as outlined in 

TEA's Financial Accountability System Resource Guide (FAR), and is presented on the modified accrual 

basis of accounting consistent with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The budget is 

prepared and controlled at the function level within each organization to which responsibility for controlling 

operations is assigned. 

The basis of budgeting and the basis of accounting are maintained on a modified accrual basis as 

prescribed by GAAP, with revenues being recognized in the accounting period in which they become 

available and measurable and expenditures being recognized in the accounting period in which the fund 

liability is incurred (as services are rendered). The only exception applies to unmatured interest on 

general long-term debt, which shall be recognized when due. The basis of budgeting and accounting for 

the district are built on the accounting code structure presented in the Account Code Section of the TEA 


September 

2012 24

Resource Guide, with funds, revenues and expenditures being the integral parts of the mandated account 

coding. Funds shall be classified and identified on budgets and financial statements by the same code 

number and terminology provided in the Account Code section of the TEA Resource Guide. Revenues 

shall be recorded on a gross basis and shall be classified by fund, source (object code), fiscal year and 

where fiscal integrity (separate accountability) is necessary, by program and/or project. Expenditures or 

expenses shall be classified by fund, function, object, organization, fiscal year and program intent. 

Budgetary controls, which employ encumbering purchase orders to reserve commitments to the budget, 

include budget amendments to ensure compliance with state laws. 

Account Code Structure 

Section 44.007 of the Texas Education Code requires that a standard fiscal accounting system be 

adopted by each school district. The system must meet at least the minimum requirements prescribed by 

the State Board of Education and also be subject to review and comment by the state auditor. 

Additionally, the accounting system must conform to GAAP. The following 20-digit account codes are 

mandated throughout all public school districts in Texas. 

Fund Function Object Sub-Object Organization Fiscal Yr Program Intent 

(3 digits) (2 digits) (4 digits) (2 digits) (3 digits) (1 digit) (2 digits) blank 

X X X - X X - X X X X - X X - X X X - X - X X - X XX 

Major 

FUND 

CODE 

(1XX – 

8XX) 

Account 

Groups 

(9XX) 

Detail 

Major 

Detail 

FUNCTION 

CODE 

(11-99) 

Major 

Account 

Classification 

Detail 

OBJECT EXPENSE CODE 

Assets (1XXX) 

Liabilities (2XXX) 

Fund Equity (3XXX) 

Clearing Accounts (4XXX) 

Revenue/Income (5XXX) 

Expenditures/ 

Expenses (6XXX) 

Other Resources/Non- 

Operating Revenues/ 

Residual Equity 

Transfers 

In (7XXX) 

Other Uses/Non- 

Operating 

Revenues/Residual 

Equity Transfers 

Out (8XXX) 

LOCAL 

OPTION 

CODES 1 

and 2 

(XX) 

ORGANIZATION 

CODE 

(XXX) 

FISCAL 

YEAR 

CODE 

(0-9) 

PROGRAM 

INTENT CODE 

(11-99) 

Indicates a mandatory code 

for State reporting 

purposes. 

Indicates a code that may 

be used at location option. 

LOCAL 

OPTION 

CODES 

3; 4 & 5 

(X; XX) 

The 20-digit account code includes fund, function, object, local option codes 1 and 2, organization, fiscal 

year, program intent codes and local option codes 3, 4 and 5. The solid lines indicate mandatory coding 

whereas dotted lines indicate local optional coding. The account code defines transaction detail. It will tell 

the reader what was generally purchased, which campus or department made the purchase, the purpose 

of the purchase and the major source of funds that was used. 


September 

2012 25

Budget Challenges 

In 2011, for the first time in 60 years, the Texas Legislature failed to fully fund the Foundation School 

Program. Faced with a substantial budget shortfall, the 82nd Legislature reduced state formula funding to 

public school districts and eliminated funding for a host of grant programs in its biennial FY2012 and 

FY2013 state budget. These reductions total $5.4 billion compared to what school districts would have 

earned during the same two-year period under the prior funding levels. 

The impact of these cuts will be felt across the state for many years. A recent survey conducted by Moak 

Casey and Associates indicates that responding school districts have 11,833 fewer staff members than 

they would have had under the previous level of funding. Extrapolated statewide, this data suggests 

Texas school districts are employing an estimated 32,000 fewer staff today than they would have without 

the recent funding cuts. Most districts surveyed also anticipate additional staff losses next year. 

Austin ISD also has struggled during these tough times. The district lost about $37.5 million in funding in 

FY2012 and had to implement a reduction in force that resulted in the elimination of 1,153 positions. AISD 

will lose approximately $59.1 million in FY2013 which is an additional $21.6 million from the prior year, 

which has been factored into the adopted budget, for a total of $96.6 million in losses this fiscal biennium. 

Finally, state budget language that eliminates the districts “hold harmless” funding translates to a total 

loss of about $150 million for Austin between FY2012 and FY2018. 

Many districts across the state are considering litigation as a means to work toward overall structural 

improvements to the Texas system of school finance, and a broad-based, unified group of school districts 

is prepared to challenge the current system to bring about change that will benefit Texas students. The 

AISD Board of Trustees unanimously adopted a resolution to join a school finance lawsuit filed by 

Thompson & Horton LLP. The Board believes that the claims brought in this suit are most closely aligned 

with the goals and priorities of AISD. 

A History of Financial Challenges: A Multi-Year Strategy 

The district has managed through several years of financial austerity: 

 

 

 

2005 Legislature, 3rd called session - HB1 (FY2007) froze school district revenues at FY2006 

levels without compensating for inflation. Annually, this means AISD must absorb $18-21 million 

in inflationary costs with no additional funding. 

2009 Legislature (FY2010 & FY2011) provided minimal relief, giving districts an extra $120 per 

weighted student, or $12 million in revenue for AISD. But the legislature required staff raises, 

which cost AISD $13 million. 

2011 Legislative (FY2012 & FY2013) made unprecedented cuts to public school funding. 

Multi-year financial planning has been crucial in managing district finances in the face of a challenging 

budget climate, which has included a decline in the district's tax base, operational deficits, state funding 

cuts, and expiring federal funding, all while navigating through a sluggish economy. 

To improve the ability to manage the district's financial condition over time, the Board in December 2009 

began to look at multi-year fiscal forecasts for AISD. At that time, the district's spending was escalating at 


September 

2012 26

an annual average of nearly 7 percent, exceeding the rate of student growth, inflation and projected 

revenue. These escalating expenditures, coupled with reductions in state and federal funding and rising 

costs for healthcare, utilities and other inflationary factors, created a structural imbalance in the district's 

budget. 

In response to these fiscal challenges, AISD has been austerity planning for the past three years. 

During FY2010, 18 central office positions were eliminated, which saved more than $700,000. A central 

office hiring freeze saved the district more than $1.5 million. 

During FY2011, the district cut $27 million from the central office budget by: 

Eliminating more than 100 positions and enacting a hiring freeze 

Restricting travel and curtailing operating expenses 

Eliminating paper pay checks 

Moving towards self-insurance 

Undertaking other cost-savings measures, including implementing a one-week shut down and a 

10-hour/four-day work week in July to save on energy costs and other operational expenses 

In order to address FY2012 state aid reductions, the Board of Trustees adopted a Declaration of Financial 

Exigency as precursor to a reduction in force effective. As a result, the district was able to implement an 

aggressive Deficit Management Plan, which included the elimination of 1,153 positions, allowing the 

district to offset a reduction of $37.5 million in state funds, a loss of nearly $64 million in federal stimulus 

funds and a reduction of $20 million in state grants. 

Savings from the personnel cuts, however, were not sufficient to cover the projected FY2012 deficit, 

which required the district to implement other cost-savings measures, including, but not limited to: 

 

 

 

 

 

Imposing hiring freezes and 30-day wait periods to fill non-essential positions in central 

departments 

Increasing employee contributions for the same level of health coverage 

Reducing departmental budgets and support for professional development travel and food 

Implementing a one-week shut down and a 10-hour/four-day work week in July 

Reducing programmatic funding for programs such as athletics, summer school and school 

turnaround initiatives 


September 

2012 27

Table 16 


Savings from Cuts, Cost Avoidance and Revenue Measures 

$14,564,721 

$32,239,105 

$30,824,483 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

Resource Capacity to Support a Fast-Growing and Diverse Student Population 

AISD is experiencing significant population growth at the same time that the district faces unprecedented 

losses in state and federal revenue. During the past five years, the number of students in AISD has 

increased by 6 percent. AISD now serves approximately 87,000 students, about 5,000 more than 

attended AISD in FY2008. On average, the district continues to grow by about 850 students per year – at 

a rate two-to-three times faster than the state’s student population, which itself is growing at a faster rate 

than the nation’s student population. 

While many neighboring districts are also serving more students each year, much of the new growth in 

AISD is among economically disadvantaged students. The demographic makeup of the district’s student 

population has shifted, and our changing student population is more costly to serve. The district must 

establish new delivery models and support strategies in order to educate an increasingly diverse student 

population with the following characteristics: 

2 in 3 AISD students qualify for free-and-reduced lunch; 

1 in 3 AISD students speak a first language other than English; and 

1 in 10 AISD students has a learning or other disability. 

Other Challenges 

Several other budget factors also have an impact on the district’s financial position: 

 

AISD is considered “property-wealthy” under the states “recapture” law, which requires the district 

to send $135.2 million to the state for redistribution to property-poor school districts in FY2012. In 

FY2012, AISD will remit 20 percent of every penny of tax revenue generated locally to the state. 

Over the last 10 years, AISD has paid the almost $1.4 billion in recapture payments, all of which 

comes from tax dollars generated in Austin. For more on recapture, please see pages 35-36. 


September 

2012 28

AISD is among a handful of Texas school districts required to participate in two retirement 

programs — the federal Social Security system, and the Teacher Retirement System of Texas. 

AISD incurs approximately $33 million per year in employer Social Security taxes; this is a cost 

most other Texas school districts do not have to bear. 

The district's participation in Social Security is not universally popular among teachers. Teachers 

with more experience tend to view it favorably because of the extra support it provides, while 

teachers with less experience tend to view it as a negative because it represents a hit to their 

paychecks. 

 

 

 

Our district is changing. The district has experienced significant changes in demography over the 

past ten years. While our student population has grown by 11 percent, our economically 

disadvantaged student population has grown by 28 percent. Approximately 64 percent of 

students qualify for free or reduced lunch; our English language learner population has grown by 

44 percent and currently comprises 29 percent of our student enrollment. We have seen a 

significant growth in our Hispanic students and a slight decrease in our African American and 

White student populations. 

In order to close the digital divide, AISD must make greater investments in its technology 

infrastructure. The Strategic Plan goals necessitate considerable advances in the technology 

available in the classrooms for both teacher and student use. 

Maintenance spending falls short. While AISD completes the 2004 and 2008 Apple at Work Bond 

Programs, the district falls short in funding routine maintenance. The American Schools and 

Universities benchmark per-square-foot maintenance cost is $5.49 compared to the $3.17 persquare-foot 

investment by AISD. An additional investment of $35.4 million would be necessary to 

bring the district to this basic maintenance funding level. 

FY2013 Adopted Budget Assumptions 

Multiple assumptions were used to build the FY2013 Adopted Budget. The following assumptions impact 

the FY2013 revenue: 

• Decrease of $59.1 million in General Fund state aid from prior HB3646 levels. 

• Expiring Edujobs funding offset by an increase of $4.5 million in Medicaid collections 

• Increase in students in average daily attendance (ADA) and the weighted count of students in 

ADA (WADA). Substantial increase in WADA due to methodology state used to pass down cuts. 

• Assumes increase in collectability at a rate of 99 percent consistent with FY2012 collections 

• Assumes no change in the M&O and I&S tax rate at this time. 

• The district will continue to discuss the possibility of Tax Ratification Election to generate 

additional recurring revenue for future year budgets. 

• Amends the AISD historic property tax exemption program with recent program modifications 

approved by the Austin City Council to effectively cap the historic exemption at $3,500 for 

properties that are designated or change owners after December 31, 2011. 

• Proposes use of $28 million in General Fund reserves, which would leave an estimated $184.6 

million unreserved/unassigned. This would still allow the district to stay within policy and at a level 

consistent with FY2010 when AISD became ‘triple-A” rated. 


September 

2012 29

Budget Analysis 

General Fund 

Pays for salaries and benefits, classroom resources, campus cleaning and landscaping, transporting 

students, paying utility bills, providing clerical and administrative support – all the things schools and 

support centers need to operate on a daily basis. 

Food Service Fund 

Pays for the operation of the district’s food service program. 

Debt Service Fund 

Pays the debt on bonds previously approved by district voters for building construction and renovation. 

Special Revenue Fund (Grants) 

Accounts for the proceeds of specific revenue sources such as federal categorical, state or locally 

financed programs where unused balances are returned to the grant. These funds are tied to specific 

programmatic deliverables and expenditure restrictions. 

Capital Projects Fund 

Pays for construction and renovation projects in district facilities. 

Special Revenue Funds and Capital Project Funds are provided for informational purposes only. Special 

Revenue Funds are approved separately by the Board of Trustees when final grant awards are made. 

Capital Projects Funds have been previously authorized through the bond election process. 


September 

2012 30

Fund Structure Diagram 

All Funds 

Governmental Fund Types 

Propriety Fund Types 

Fiduciary Fund Types 

Internal Service Funds 

Agency Funds 

General Fund Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Fund Capital Projects Fund 

OFFICIALLY ADOPTED FUNDS (See Note 1) 

Governmental Funds 

General Fund Food Service Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Fund 

Note 1: The audited financial statements of the School District include all funds as shown in the “All Funds” 

structure Diagram above. However, the Texas Education Agency requires only the adoption of the General Fund, 

Food Service Special Revenue Funds, and Debt Service Fund in August. 


September 

2012 31

Major Funds 

Table 17 


Major Funds 

Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance 

For School Year FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years 

FY2012 

Major Funds 

Budget 

Governmental 

Adopted Total 

Capital 

Projects 

Major Federal 

Grants 

Proprietary 

Funds 

Revenues 

5700 Local Sources $810,754,556 $ 787,058,513 $ 10,400 $ - $ 73,413,573 $ 860,482,486 

5800 State Sources 171,448,575 111,405,434 - - - $ 111,405,434 

5900 Federal Sources 114,118,596 52,046,828 - 61,263,964 - 113,310,792 

Combined Fund Revenue Total $1,096,321,727 $950,510,775 $10,400 $61,263,964 $73,413,573 $1,085,198,712 

Expenditures 

11 Instruction $453,365,672 $ 432,107,452 $ - $ 34,703,005 $ - $ 466,810,457 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 11,434,085 10,785,702 - 204,801 - 10,990,503 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 23,527,289 16,394,100 - 9,801,868 - 26,195,968 

21 Instructional Administration 12,154,316 10,194,410 - 2,040,461 - 12,234,871 

23 School Administration 48,654,972 47,911,053 - 2,417,416 - 50,328,469 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 22,929,690 19,694,749 - 4,130,138 - 23,824,887 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 4,030,496 2,906,651 - 345,794 - 3,252,445 

33 Health Services 6,102,113 6,131,553 - 88,360 - 6,219,913 

34 Pupil Transportation 24,918,580 27,109,548 - 700,000 - 27,809,548 

35 Food Services 38,297,927 39,245,441 - - - 39,245,441 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 13,327,498 13,376,167 - 313,480 - 13,689,647 

41 General Administration 85,992,227 18,248,506 - 285,599 73,413,573 91,947,678 

51 Plant Maintenance 80,748,877 80,564,129 2,005,423 27,035 - 82,596,587 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 9,583,726 9,897,984 - 13,610 - 9,911,594 

53 Data Processing Services 17,878,914 17,803,638 20,055 942,998 - 18,766,691 

61 Community Services 7,788,792 4,627,381 - 5,249,399 - 9,876,780 

71 Debt Services 96,967,282 103,621,679 - - - 103,621,679 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 71,454,890 1,320,000 32,635,685 - - 33,955,685 

91 Contracted Instructional Srvcs-Public Schools 135,176,524 111,739,859 - - - 111,739,859 

93 Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,233,902 1,658,106 - - - 1,658,106 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 4,717,540 4,164,661 - - - 4,164,661 

Combined Fund Expenditure Total $ 1,170,285,312 $ 979,502,769 $ 34,661,163 $ 61,263,964 $ 73,413,573 $ 1,148,841,469 

Net Revenue Over (Under) $ (73,963,585) $ (28,991,994) $ (34,650,763) $ - $ - $ (63,642,757) 

Other Sources (Uses) 

7900 Other Resources 51,000 51,000 - - - 51,000 

8900 Other Uses (81,000) (81,000) - - - (81,000) 

Net Sources Over (Under) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ - $ - $ - $ (30,000) 


Net Revenue/Sources Over (Under) $ (73,993,585) $ (29,021,994) $ (34,650,763) $ - $ - $ (63,672,757) 

Estimated outstanding purchase orders and 

unspent balances at year end $ 30,067,804 $ - $ 28,250,911 $ - $ - $ 28,250,911 

Total 

Beginning Fund Balance (Estimated) $ 272,886,155 $ 277,672,346 $ (74,001,628) $ - $ 25,289,656 $ 228,960,374 

Ending Fund Balance (Estimated) 228,960,374 248,650,352 (136,903,302) - 25,289,656 193,538,528 

Less Assigned Balance (48,983,942) (35,530,274) - - - (35,530,274) 

Ending Funding Balance - Unassigned $ 179,976,432 $ 213,120,078 $ (136,903,302) $ - $ 25,289,656 $ 158,008,254 


September 

2012 32

Table 18 


Major Funds Percent of Expenditure Budget 

For School Year 2013 


Budgeted 

Expenditures 

Fund Type 

Percent 

Governmental Funds 979,502,769 85% 

Capital Projects 34,661,163 3% 

Major Federal Grants 61,263,964 5% 

Proprietary Funds 73,413,573 6% 

1,148,841,469 100% 

Governmental 

Funds 

85% 

Capital Projects 

3% 

Major Federal 

Grants 

5% 

Proprietary 

Funds 

7% 


The budget that the Board is required to take action on is comprised of the three primary funds, known as 

the Governmental Funds, which are the General Fund, Food Service Fund, and Debt Service Fund. The 

FY2013 total governmental expenditures are projected to be $979.5 million. The total revenues for these 

funds are approximately $950.5 million. The planned deficits will be covered with the fund balance 

reserves. Revenue is expected to decrease by $21.9 million or 2.25 percent and expenditures will 

increase by $5.2 million or 0.54 percent over the prior year adopted budget. 


September 

2012 33

Table 19 



Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance 


FY2012 

Governmental 

Adopted Total 

General Fund 

Food 

Service Fund 

Debt 

Service Fund 

Revenues 

5700 Local Sources $742,072,311 $ 677,368,777 $ 8,392,715 $ 101,297,021 $ 787,058,513 

5800 State Sources 171,448,575 110,259,107 1,146,327 - 111,405,434 

5900 Federal Sources 58,916,699 20,386,584 30,675,778 984,466 52,046,828 

Combined Fund Revenue Total $972,437,585 $808,014,468 $40,214,820 $102,281,487 $950,510,775 

Expenditures 

11 Instruction $419,734,596 $ 432,107,452 $ - $ - $ 432,107,452 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 11,321,673 10,785,702 - - 10,785,702 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 16,259,504 16,394,100 - - 16,394,100 

21 Instructional Administration 9,795,691 10,194,410 - - 10,194,410 

23 School Administration 46,812,796 47,911,053 - - 47,911,053 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 18,726,353 19,694,749 - - 19,694,749 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 2,970,687 2,906,651 - - 2,906,651 

33 Health Services 5,946,564 6,131,553 - - 6,131,553 

34 Pupil Transportation 24,488,580 27,109,548 - - 27,109,548 

35 Food Services 38,297,927 - 39,245,441 - 39,245,441 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 13,262,821 13,376,167 - - 13,376,167 

41 General Administration 17,064,813 18,248,506 - - 18,248,506 

51 Plant Maintenance 78,925,932 79,012,294 1,551,835 - 80,564,129 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 9,577,526 9,897,984 - - 9,897,984 

53 Data Processing Services 17,244,095 17,803,638 - - 17,803,638 

61 Community Services 4,426,066 4,627,381 - - 4,627,381 

71 Debt Services 96,967,282 877,565 - 102,744,114 103,621,679 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 1,320,000 1,320,000 - - 1,320,000 

91 Contracted Instructional Srvcs-Public Schools 135,176,524 111,739,859 - - 111,739,859 

93 Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,233,902 1,658,106 - - 1,658,106 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 4,717,540 4,164,661 - - 4,164,661 

Combined Fund Expenditure Total $ 974,270,872 $ 835,961,379 $ 40,797,276 $ 102,744,114 $ 979,502,769 

Net Revenue Over (Under) $ (1,833,287) $ (27,946,911) $ (582,456) $ (462,627) $ (28,991,994) 


7900 Other Resources 51,000 51,000 - 51,000 

8900 Other Uses (81,000) (81,000) - (81,000) 

Net Sources Over (Under) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ - $ - $ (30,000) 

Net Revenue/Sources Over (Under) $ (1,863,287) $ (27,976,911) $ (582,456) $ (462,627) $ (29,021,994) 


unspent balances at year end $ 30,064,925 


Total 

Beginning Fund Balance (Estimated) $ 249,470,708 $ 248,072,693 $ 8,760,016 $ 20,839,642 $ 277,672,346 

Ending Fund Balance (Estimated) 277,672,346 220,095,782 8,177,560 20,377,015 248,650,352 

Less Assigned Balance (48,983,942) (35,530,274) - - (35,530,274) 

Ending Funding Balance - Unassigned $ 228,688,404 $ 184,565,508 $ 8,177,560 $ 20,377,015 $ 213,120,078 

Ending Fund Balance as a % of Total Budget 

Expenditures 23% 22% 20% 20% 22% 


September 

2012 34

Table 20 


Expenditure Budget for Three Primary Funds and Recapture 

FY2013 Adopted Budget 

Food Service 

40,797,276 

4% 

General Fund 

724,221,520 

74% 

Chapter 41 

111,739,859 

11% 

Debt Serivice 

102,744,114 

11% 

The General Fund constitutes the largest portion of the Governmental Funds, representing $724.2 million, 

or 74 percent, when recapture is included. Recapture, or Chapter 41, constitutes the next largest share at 

$111.7 million or 11 percent. The Debt Service Fund represents 11 percent and the Food Service Fund 

represents 4 percent of the Governmental Funds. 

What is Recapture? 

Recapture, which represents 11 percent of Austin ISD’s governmental funds, is a function of Chapter 41 

of the Texas Education Code, which equalizes educational spending across school districts that have 

varying amounts of property wealth. The Chapter 41 provision recaptures local tax dollars from “propertyrich” 

districts and redistributes the funds to “property-poor” districts. Under this law, “golden pennies” 

represent the 6 cents that property-rich school districts like AISD are allowed to retain in revenue above 

the one-dollar tax that is assessed on all taxable property values. Any revenue collected on property 

taxes above these 6 cents is subject to recapture by the state. In other words, in FY2012, nearly 45.3 

percent of the revenue generated beyond the 6 cents is sent to the state for redistribution to property-poor 

school districts. In FY2012, nearly one fifth or 20 percent of all local revenue collected from property taxes 

is subject to recapture. In FY2013, the district projects a slight reduction in recapture; approximately 16.7 

percent of all local revenue collected will be subject to Recapture and 43 percent of the revenue 

generated beyond the 6 cents will be subject to Recapture. 

In FY2012, it is projected that AISD will submit $135.2 million to the state in recapture funds. This amount 

is expected to decrease in FY2013 by $23.5 million for a total of $111.7 million as a result of projected 

increases in the district’s WADA, which was reduced by the state in FY2012 as part of the methodology 

that was used by the legislature to appropriate cuts in the first year of the fiscal biennium. Although the 

district will submit less in recapture payments to the state, the total revenue AISD collects will shrink to a 

much larger degree. During the past 10 years, Austin ISD has paid the State of Texas almost $1.4 billion 

in recapture payments. 


September 

2012 35

Table 21 


Recapture Payments Compared to General Fund Expenditure Budget 

For FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years 

$1,000,000,000 

$800,000,000 

$600,000,000 

$400,000,000 

$200,000,000 

$0 


Total GF Budget 

Chapter 41 Payments 


September 

2012 36

General Fund 

General Fund: Where the Money Comes From 

The General Fund is the largest of the funds that AISD manages. The General Fund is used to support 

the operation of the school system and is comprised of three major sources: local, state, and federal. The 

General Fund is commonly referred to as the “Operating Fund” or “Local Maintenance Fund”. State aid 

and local property tax revenue are major sources of revenues for this fund. 

Local Funding 

Local funding consists of property taxes for the current year or prior years, investment earnings, athletic 

activities revenue, insurance recovery, grants, and school bonds. Local revenue accounts for $677.4 

million or 83.8 percent of all available sources of funding for the FY2013 General Fund budget. Of this 

amount, the largest source of revenue is $671.6 million in local property taxes, which is derived from the 

current and delinquent property tax payments. The FY2013 Adopted Budget predicts a 6.1 percent 

increase in total local revenue sources as compared to the prior year FY2012 Adopted Budget. 

State Funding 

State funding is based on a complex formula, determined by the legislature, which considers the number 

of students served, and is based on poverty levels, attendance rates, special programs, bilingual factors, 

taxable property wealth, and other factors. State revenue accounts for $110.3 million, or 13.6 percent of 

the total revenues of the General Fund budget. State funding will decrease by $60 million, or 35.3 percent 

from the prior FY2012 Adopted Budget. Of the $110.3 million in state revenue, approximately $30 million 

are TRS on behalf payments, which are not part of the state funding formula. In FY2013, Austin ISD will 

actually pay more to the state than it will receive in state aid due to the changes in the school funding 

formula passed by the previous legislature. 

Federal Funding 

Federal funding, reflected in the General Fund, constitutes earnings from indirect cost from federal grant 

expenditures, and revenues received for school health and related services (SHARS), a Medicaid 

reimbursement program. The district has limited flexibility in how it spends federal revenue (and a portion 

of state revenue). Federal sources account for $20.4 million or 2.5 percent of the total revenue of the 

General Fund budget. The largest source of federal funding is the School Health and Related Services 

program, which represents $18 million. The district will not receive any additional funding in FY2013 from 

the one year Edujobs Grant, which provided $13.8 million in federal revenue in FY2012. Federal revenue 

is estimated to decrease by $8.7 million or 29.9 percent from the prior year adopted budget as a result of 

this loss. 


September 

2012 37

Table 22 


Funding / Revenue Sources – General Fund 

For School Year FY2013 with Comparative Data from Prior Year 

Revenue Source 

FY2012 Adopted 


FY2013 Adopted 


% of FY2013 

Adopted 

Revenue $ Change % Change 

Local Revenue $ 638,484,837 $ 677,368,777 83.8% $ 38,883,940 6.1% 

State Revenue 170,302,248 110,259,107 13.6% (60,043,141) -35.3% 

Federal Revenue 29,085,672 20,386,584 2.5% (8,699,088) -29.9% 

Total 837,872,757 808,014,468 100.0% (29,858,289) -3.6% 

Less: Recapture 135,176,524 111,739,859 13.8% (23,436,665) -17.3% 

Operating Revenue $ 702,696,233 $ 696,274,609 86.2% $ (6,421,624) -0.9% 

Table 23 


General Fund Revenue Sources 

For School Year FY2013 

Local Revenue 

83.8% State Revenue 

13.6% 

Federal Revenue 

2.5% 


September 

2012 38

Changes from the FY2012 Adopted Budget 

To the FY2013 Adopted Budget 

As a result of budget actions taken over the past three years, district reserves are now sufficient to cover 

the anticipated FY2013 deficit and to stabilize staffing. The FY2013 Adopted Budget includes a one-time 

compensation adjustment for all regular employees equivalent of a 3 percent increase, since salaries 

have been frozen for the last two fiscal years. The FY2013 Adopted Budget also includes increased 

expenditures resulting from the implementation of the Annual Academic and Facilities Recommendations, 

support for continuing and new Strategic Plan investments and escalating baseline costs for expenditures 

such as healthcare, energy and fuel. Details of the increases and decreases from the FY2012 Adopted 

Budget to the FY2013 Adopted Budget are listed on pages 43-45. 

Addressing Human Capital 

Due to budget challenges, salaries in AISD have been frozen for two years (FY2011 and FY2012), while 

most surrounding districts have frozen salaries for only one year. As a result, retaining and attracting high 

quality staff is becoming more challenging as the gap between AISD salaries and those of surrounding 

districts continues to widen. A recent analysis indicates that, excluding the value of the district’s Social 

Security contributions, AISD teacher salaries are 3.6 percent lower than those in other central Texas 

school districts, including Round Rock, Eanes and Pflugerville, and 11.3 percent lower than those in 

Houston, Dallas and other urban districts. AISD teacher salaries are 9.5 percent lower than teachers in 

districts identified as peers under the state's school district efficiency and performance rating system -- 

the Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST). 

Teacher Salary Comparison with Local districts (Excludes Social Security Tax) 


September 

2012 39

Teacher Salary Comparison with Local Districts (Includes Social Security Tax) 

6.2 percent Added to Austin ISD for Comparison Purposes 

This gap continues to widen as most districts have taken actions to increase salaries for next year. To 

maintain ground, the district has implemented a two-year compensation strategy that provides at least the 

equivalent of a 3 percent salary increase for the next two years. The FY2013 Adopted Budget includes 

costs to support payment allotments to all employees for one year only, to provide the equivalent of a 3 

percent increase (non-recurring), which will cost an estimated $14.2 million. This payment will be funded 

out of district reserves. 

If the Board approves, the district will need to make an additional payment of $14.6 million in FY2014 

from reserves to cover this action in the subsequent year. While reserve levels are strong, the district 

would only be able to sustain two years of payments unless revenue levels are increased considerably. If 

Austin voters chose to approve a tax rate increase through a Tax Ratification Election (TRE) in the future, 

the district could effectuate the salary increase and make it permanent for all employees. 

Implementing the Annual Academic and Facilities Recommendations (AAFRs) 

In December 2011, the Board of Trustees approved all six of the AAFRs presented by the 

Superintendent. 

1. Expand Dual Language Immersion Programs to four additional schools 

The recommended delivery model for this scenario is the establishment of: 

• One (1) one-way Chinese dual language immersion program at Doss Elementary School; and 

• Three (3) two-way Spanish dual language immersion programs at Blanton, Casey and Galindo 

elementary schools. 

2. Address North Central elementary schools overcrowding 

• Move 6th grade students at Barrington and Brown elementary schools to Webb Middle School. 

• Move 6th grade students at Walnut Creek Elementary School to Dobie Middle School. 

• Create a pre-kindergarten center at Dobie Middle School; and reassign Pre-K students from 

Graham and Hart elementary schools to Dobie Middle School. 

• Create a Pre-K through 8 th grade model at Webb Middle School, using a phased process. 

• Reassign remaining Barrington Elementary School Pre-K students to Reilly Elementary School. 

• Reassign Barrington Elementary School students residing in the southeast portion of the current 

attendance zone, roughly bounded by E. Walnut Drive on the north, IH 35 on the east, E 

Anderson Lane on the south and Georgian Drive on the west to the proposed Webb Pre-K-8 

School 


September 

2012 40

3. Redesign Learning Support Centers/Disciplinary Placement 

• Through a new delivery model, operate a Learning Support Center that will serve all mandatory 

removals and only those discretionary removals where the student is considered a safety 

concern. 

• If an outside provider is not identified, AISD will continue serving students using the Learning 

Support Center model. 

• Students removed from the classroom for discretionary reasons will be served on their home 

campuses. 

4. Designate the North Central Area of the District for the location of the undesignated 2008 Bond 

Program Elementary School 

5. Establish a Graduation Pathways Education Program, In-District Charter School with Responsive 

Education Solutions 

The recommended delivery model for this scenario is an in-district charter program agreement with 

Responsive Education Solutions serving Travis and Lanier high schools. 

6. Establish a College Preparation, In-District Charter School with IDEA Public Schools 

The recommended delivery model for this scenario is a contractual agreement with IDEA Public 

Schools for a K-12 college preparatory, in-district charter program. This college preparatory design 

emphasizes core curriculum, core values and a no-excuse, results-driven culture that prepares 

students for success in college and citizenship by developing the academic, social, and leadership 

skills students need to be successful. 

Strategic Plan Investments 

AISD is committed to implementing, monitoring and executing the Strategic Plan framework. As we enter 

the third year of this process, funding the initiatives in the Strategic Plan will remain a major goal in the 

budget process. Increases have been incorporated into the FY2013 budget to support Strategic Plan 

outcomes. 

Many of the proposed increases will support programming that was already in place but previously funded 

with grants that are now expiring. The district is now allocating local resources to maintain support for 

important programming, including the Twilight Schools, which operate during non-traditional hours to 

serve students at risk of dropping out; the Early College programs at LBJ and Reagan high schools; and 

tutoring services. 

There are several new Strategic Plan investments being proposed that will strengthen the district’s ability 

to meet Board Priorities for FY2013. The new Strategic Plan investments includes the implementing a 

dual-phase dyslexia program, increasing the number of kindergarten through 2 nd grade students reading 

at or above grade level, providing support for the Social and Emotional Learning Program, creating a 

substitute custodial pool to meet school-level housekeeping needs, allotting funds to the Texas Virtual 

School Network and increasing the number of air conditioner mechanics and plumbers to reduce the work 

order backlog and reduce overtime pay. 


September 

2012 41

Continuing to Increase District Efficiency and Capacity 

There are a number of initiatives included in the budget that will allow the district to increase its efficiency. 

Energy 

Last summer, the district launched an aggressive energy savings program by implementing a one-week 

shut down and a 10-hour/four-day work week in July. The district saved around $334,000 in FY2011. In 

FY2012, the district realized approximately an 8.7 percent savings during the first five months of the fiscal 

year and anticipates an overall average of 5 percent savings by year end. 

The City of Austin and Austin Energy had a very public debate about increasing the energy rates. Austin 

Energy proposed increasing the base electric rates for the first time since 1994. The Austin City Council 

approved a new residential and commercial structure with an increased rate structure. Beginning in 

October 2012, the district is anticipating paying higher energy rates to Austin Energy. The district is 

hopeful lower temperatures and increased efficiency will help off-set the higher energy rates. The adopted 

budget includes an increase of $69,052 to support a sustainability coordinator to implement energy 

savings throughout the district and reduce future costs. 

Resource Development 

As discussed in the Strategic Partnerships and Development section, AISD has begun to seek alternative 

and private donors to support ongoing and future needs. The district would like to employ an additional 

grant writer to support a higher volume of grant-writing. An evaluation analyst is also needed, because 

most grant applications require an expertly designed evaluation and/or research plan, logic model, and a 

creation and/or review of data collection instruments and materials. These positions could support the 

submission of an additional $10 million in proposals for the district, which would more than offset the 

additional cost of $172,000 to fund the new positions. 

Health and Wellness 

In FY2011, the district became self-insured under its benefits plan. This essentially means that the district 

bears the cost and risks associated with its employee health plan. Even though this saves the district an 

estimated $13 million, AISD must implement efforts to contain future healthcare costs, which can escalate 

annually between 10 percent and 12 percent. 

Beginning in FY2013, the district will implement a wellness program that will focus on efforts to reduce or 

prevent disease severity and treatment costs through early detection. According to the Wellness Council 

of America, every dollar invested in wellness saves a company $3 in healthcare costs. If AISD invested 

$1.3 million during a three-year period, this could result in a return of approximately $3.9 million. This 

investment will be funded with proceeds from the health fund reserves and will result in a zero net effect 

on the General Fund budget. 


September 

2012 42

Table 24 


Changes in General Fund Revenues and Expenditures 

From the FY2012 Adopted Budget to FY2013 Adopted Budget 

Revenue 

1 Decrease in State Aid $ (60,043,141) 

2 Decrease in Education Jobs funding $ (13,798,672) 

3 Increase in tax levy, current and prior years $ 

37,689,358 

4 Increase in the School Health Reimbursement Program (SHARS) $ 

4,523,989 

5 Increase in Tuition and Fees $ 

870,955 

6 Increase in Federal Indirect Costs $ 

563,595 

7 Other $ 

284,627 

Net Change in Revenues $ (29,909,289) 

Expenditures 

A Employee Payments 

One-time 3% compensation adjustment for all regular employees $ 

14,160,000 

B New Delivery Models/Implementing the Annual Academic and Facilities 

Recommendations (AAFRs) 

1 North Central elementary schools overcrowding $ 

1,444,371 

2 Dual Language Immersion Programs to four additional schools $ 

191,192 

3 In-District Charter: Graduation Pathways Education Program $ 

1,023,512 

4 In-District Charter: IDEA Allan College Preparation $ 

323,445 

Sub-Total $ 

2,982,520 

C Additions For Continuing Strategic Plan Initiatives 

5 Provide early Pre-K registration so that students are enrolled and have access to 

free/reduced lunch on the first day of school. Pre-K testing materials. $ 

151,000 

6 Addition AIMS web licenses to include grades 3 through 9 $ 

246,063 

7 Continue funding the Twilight Program at its north and south campus. The program has 

been successful in reclaiming dropouts and providing an evening school option for 

students to reclaim/accelerate course credits and meet graduation requirements. To 

date, participating students have reclaimed 808 credits, and 177 students have 

graduated. $ 

780,045 

8 Continue supporting the Schoolnet Instructional Management System after the grant 

expires. $ 

71,404 

9 Continue supporting external service providers and their grantors so that they can 

monitor the outcomes of students that are served by their programs, maintaining 

National Student Clearinghouse data for post secondary enrollment, and the Substance 

Use and Safety Survey once grants expire. $ 

53,450 

10 Expand the existing ACE program for 35 tutors to 80 tutors who will serve students at a 

third of AISD's elementary campuses. ACE tutors provide small group and whole class 

research and early literacy intervention. $ 

300,000 

11 Bus monitors for Uphaus ECC bus transportation $ 

243,000 

12 Continue supporting multicultural outreach initiatives through contracted programming 

such as radio shows, parental engagement, support for multiple languages in addition to 

Spanish, and support educational fairs. $ 

159,000 

13 Anderson Vertical Team to implement "One World Schools," based on the tenants of the 

International Baccalaureate Organization. $ 

288,658 

Sub-Total $ 

2,292,620 


September 

2012 43

Table 24 (continued) 




D New Strategic Plan Investments 

14 Implement a dual-phase dyslexia program that includes a dyslexia specialist, multi 

sensory reading program materials, and training. $ 

128,000 

15 Increase the number of K-2 students reading at or above grade level with the addition of 

10 Primary Literacy Campus Specialists. $ 

849,490 

16 Provide clerical support for the Social and Emotional Learning Program $ 

25,000 

17 Create a substitute hiring pool for custodians to keep up with school level housekeeping 

needs. $ 

130,504 

18 Allot funding for the Texas Virtual School Network (TxVSN), which allows students to take 

online courses for high school credit. $ 

70,000 

19 Additional A/C mechanics and plumbers to reduce the work order backlog and reduce 

overtime pay. $ 

284,663 

Sub-total $ 

1,487,657 

E Statutorily Required or Contractually Obligated 

20 Plan for projected increase in special education student enrollment and PPCD 

increases. In FY2012, there was an increase of 497 students in special education and 

a 25% increase in students requiring PPCD services. $ 

1,618,954 

21 Conduct summer retesting for an additional grade as required under new state 

$ 

110,000 

assessment requirements for end-of-course test takers. 

22 Provide transportation services for students retaking end-of-course assessments and $ 

150,000 

STAAR exit-level in July 2013. 

23 Provide transportation services for three additional student days of instruction (district 

calendar change) $ 

180,000 

24 Fund increased annual fees imposed by the Greater Austin/Travis Regional Radio 

System for radio communications used by bus transportation, police, school 

administrators, emergency management and maintenance. $ 

20,000 

25 Pay the increasing cost of high school graduations, including the first class of seniors at 

the Ann Richards school, and summer school graduates. $ 

36,282 

26 Fund increased enrollment and participation in the Early College High School Program 

at LBJ & Reagan high schools. Up to 1,800 students could enroll to earn dual credit 

from Austin Community College. $ 

320,000 

Sub-Total $ 

2,435,236 

F Revenue Generating or Cost Avoidance 

27 Hire a district-wide Sustainability Coordinator to analyze energy use and implement 

measures to reduce utility usage and increase energy efficiency and environmental 

sustainability, which will reduce operating expenditures in the long term. $ 

69,052 

28 Tuition based Pre-K program $ 

70,955 

29 IDEA Allan Buy Back Services (offset by revenue to be collected from IDEA) $ 

256,781 

30 Hire an additional grant writer to support the submission of an additional $10 million in 

grant proposal submission for the district. $ 

80,000 

31 Hire an additional FTE to provide additional assessment data and evaluation planning for 

the grant development process $ 

92,000 

32 Implementation of a district-wide Health and Wellness initiative to contain future 

healthcare costs 

Cost Neutral 

Sub-Total $ 

568,788 


September 

2012 44





G Baseline Increases 

33 New school operating impact costs (Uphaus ECC) $ 

1,088,283 

34 Wastewater $ 

468,684 

35 Enrollment growth $ 

4,044,934 

36 Health insurance increase $ 

3,372,438 

37 Gasoline and fuels for student transportation $ 

894,483 

Sub-Total $ 

9,868,822 

Total Additions $ 

33,795,643 

H Reductions In Budget 

38 Decrease in Chapter 41 estimate $ (23,436,665) 

39 Other budget reductions to achieve savings $ (12,898,329) 

Total Reductions $ (36,334,994) 

Net Change in the Expenditure Budget $ 

(2,539,352) 


September 

2012 45

Tax Rates 

As discussed previously, the vast majority of the district’s funds come from local sources, mainly local tax 

collections. A key component of local revenue estimation is taxable values. The tax collections from local 

property values are the largest source of income for the district. There are two types of tax rates set. The 

Maintenance and Operation (M&O), the rate applied to the tax base to support the General Fund Budget, 

and the Interest & Sinking (I&S) tax rate, the rate applied to the tax base to cover the bonds approved by 

taxpayers. 

The M&O tax rate supports the major operational and education programs of the district while the I&S tax 

rate supports the repayment of bonded debts that were authorized by Austin voters. In this budget, the 

tax rate for FY2013 will remain at $1.079 per $100 of assessed value for M&O and the I&S tax rate will 

remain at $0.163. The total tax rate for FY2013 will be $1.242. Debt service payments, which total $102.7 

million, will increase by $6.8 million from FY2012 levels. 

Table 25 


FY2013 Adopted Budget & Tax Rate for M&O and I&S 

Includes Recapture 

M&O - Salaries, utilities, supplies, maintenance, equipment, etc. 

I&S - Capital improvements, land, buses, new school buildings 

$102,744,114 

I&S Tax Rate 

$0.163 

M&O Tax Rate 

$1.079 


Construction Projects 

School Buildings 

$835,961,379 

General Fund 

Teacher/Support staff 

salaries 

Supplies & Materials 

Contracted Supplies 

Equipment 

Transportation 

Recapture 

Utilities 

M&O 

I&S (Debt) 


September 

2012 46

Combined Tax Rate 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.3700 

1.0400 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

Prior to FY2007, Austin ISD had set the M&O tax rate at $1.50 for four consecutive years. HB1 

compressed the M&O to $1.33 in FY2007 and to $1.00 in FY2008. The district was allowed to increase 

the tax rate up to six cents above the compressed rate without being subject to recapture. HB1 changed 

the tax rate structure to require that any M&O tax increase above $1.04 would require tax ratification from 

voters. The voters approved an M&O tax rate increase of $0.039 in the FY2009 school year. 

1.8000 

1.6000 

1.4000 

1.2000 

Table 26 


Tax Rate History 

1.5964 1.6137 1.6230 1.6230 

1.4930 

1.1630 1.2020 1.2020 1.2270 1.2420 1.2420 

1.0000 

0.8000 

0.6000 

0.4000 

0.2000 

0.0000 

FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 

Maintenance & Operations Interest & Sinking 

To property homeowners, a higher tax rate might result in a higher tax bill. The following table illustrates 

the average current and historical market value of a residence in relation to tax rate and tax levy. The 

difference between the average market value of a residence and the average taxable value can be a 

combination of any of the following exemptions: 

State mandated homestead exemption of $10,000 

Local over-65 exemption of $25,000 

Local disabled exemption of $15,000 


September 

2012 47

Table 27 


Analysis of Tax Burden per Travis Central Appraisal District (TCAD) 

AISD 

FY2010 


FY2011 


FY2012 



Median Market Value of Residence $ 222,549 $ 215,174 $ 210,065 $ 208,234 

Median Taxable Value 194,430 195,361 192,980 191,358 

Tax Rate per $100 Value 1.202 1.227 1.242 1.242 

Tax Levy on Median Residence 2,337 2,397 2,397 2,377 

Net Increase In Tax Levy 60 (0) (20) 

Avg Market Value of Residence $ 277,663 $ 265,573 $ 261,793 $ 262,167 

Avg Taxable Value 248,405 245,593 243,966 244,534 


Tax Levy on Average Residence 2,986 3,013 3,030 3,037 

Net Increase In Tax Levy 28 17 7 

As illustrated in the table above, there is a significant difference between the average residential median 

value and the residential average market value in relationship to residential property values and their 

respective tax levy. In general, median residential values tend to illustrate a more accurate representation 

of residential values since they are not skewed by the most expensive outlier residential values. For 

example, if there were nine residences valued at $200,000 and one residence valued at $1,000,000 the 

median home value would be $200,000 and the average home value would be $280,000. 

Median Home Value Analysis - Taxes to fund programs and services for the FY2013 school year will 

decrease by an estimated $20 for the median homeowner due to a slight decrease in the median value. 

This is based on a residence’s median market value of $208,234 (with a median taxable value of 

$191,358) in FY2013 at a tax rate of $1.242/per $100 assessed value. This is a slight decrease when 

compared to the median prior year FY2012 market value of $210,065 (with average taxable value of 

$192,980) at the same tax rate of $1.242/per $100. Based on preliminary values as of May 2012, the tax 

bill in FY2012 for a $210,065 home will be $2,397 and the tax bill in FY2013 for the same home (now 

valued at $208,234) will be $2,377. 

Average Home Value Analysis - Taxes for the FY2013 school year will increase by an estimated $7 for 

the average homeowner due to a slight increase in the average market value. This is based on a 

residence’s average market value of $262,167 (with average taxable value of $244,534) in FY2013 at a 

tax rate of $1.242/per $100 assessed value. This is a slight increase when compared to the average prior 

year FY2012 market value of $261,793 (with average taxable value of $243,966) at the same tax rate of 

$1.242/per $100. Based on the certified values as of July 2012, the tax bill in FY2012 for a $261,793 

home will be $3,030 and the tax bill in FY2013 for the same home (now valued at $262,167) will be 

$3,037. 

The state limits how much a school district can increase its tax rate from the previous year. Each taxing 

entity must calculate its rollback rate. The rollback rate is the maximum rate that can be adopted before 

an automatic rollback election takes place. If the district adopts a tax rate that is higher than the rollback 

rate, voters can either affirm the proposed higher rate through an election or roll it back to the rollback 

rate. Also, individual property value increases are capped annually at 10 percent. Despite the increase 

that was approved by voters in FY2009, Austin ISD had the second lowest tax rate in FY2012 when 

compared to other local school districts in the metro area. 


September 

2012 48

$1.6000 

$1.4000 

$1.2000 

$1.0000 

$0.8000 

$0.6000 

$0.4000 

$0.2000 

$- 

$1.2125 

Eanes ISD 

Table 28 


FY2013 Central Texas School District Property Tax Rates 

M&O 

I&S 

$1.242 



$1.380 

Round 

Rock ISD 

$1.4075 

Lake 

Travis ISD 

$1.4613 

Hays 

CISD 

$1.481 

Bastrop 


$1.5119 

Leander 


$1.515 

Manor 


$1.530 $1.540 

Del Valle 


Pfluger 

ville ISD 

I&S $0.1725 $0.1630 $0.3400 $0.3675 $0.4213 $0.4410 $0.4719 $0.4750 $0.4900 $0.5000 

M&O $1.0400 $1.0790 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 

Property Values 

Over the last ten years, the district’s taxable value growth has averaged 5.2 percent. The largest growth 

was in 2006 when the certified taxable value increased 14.4 percent and the smallest was in 2004 when 

the taxable property value decreased 3.9 percent. The net taxable property value for the AISD FY2013 

will increase by $2.2 billion or 3.9 percent over FY2012. Future year forecasts through FY2015 indicate 

property tax values will gradually increase with an annual growth rate ranging from 2.2 percent to 2.4 

percent. 

Increases in home values generally lead to higher tax bills. Texas law limits the amount that a house 

value can increase from one year to the next. Under the state’s 10 percent appraisal cap policy, even if a 

home value goes up by more than 10 percent in one year, the homeowner will not have to pay a tax 

increase beyond the 10 percent in that one-year period. 


September 

2012 49

Billions 

2003 Certified 










2013 Projected 


Table 29 


Net Taxable Value Projection (After Freeze) 

Travis Central Appraisal District (TCAD) 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

41.826 

44.525 

40.192 38.928 

50.570 

56.267 57.795 56.281 56.875 59.111 60.504 

61.822 

20 

10 

- 

Tax Year 

The 2012 certified tax levy is calculated from the net taxable value at a 99 percent collection rate. The 

above table represents the historical net taxable value for the last ten years, the current fiscal year and 

future projections. 

Taxes for homeowners age 65 years or older are “frozen” under a local provision that prevents their 

property tax payments from rising, regardless of what happens to their property values or district tax 

rates. The combination of the net taxable value levy and the levy on frozen values equals the total levy for 

the year, and is reflected in the following table. 


September 

2012 50

Taxable Values 

Table 30 


Total Tax Levy 

Forecasts 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 

Net Taxable Value (before freeze) $ 64,460,255,568 $ 61,570,945,154 $ 61,870,932,381 $ 64,852,952,572 $ 65,904,376,265 $ 67,222,463,790 

Less: Freeze Taxable Value $ (6,665,559,231) $ (5,290,263,882) $ (4,995,488,245) $ (5,742,370,929) $ (5,400,000,000) $ (5,400,000,000) 

Net Taxable Value (after freeze) $ 57,794,696,337 $ 56,280,681,272 $ 56,875,444,136 $ 59,110,581,643 $ 60,504,376,265 $ 61,822,463,790 

Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year $ 1,528,112,380 $ (1,514,015,065) $ 594,762,864 $ 2,235,137,507 $ 1,393,794,622 $ 1,318,087,525 

% Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year 2.7158% -2.6196% 1.0568% 3.9299% 2.3579% 2.1785% 

Net Taxable Levy $ 694,692,250 $ 690,563,959 $ 706,393,016 $ 734,153,424 $ 751,464,353 $ 767,835,000 

Freeze Ceiling Taxes $ 30,106,823 $ 28,405,788 $ 32,000,000 $ 37,600,000 $ 37,600,000 $ 37,600,000 

Total Levy $ 724,799,073 $ 718,969,747 $ 738,393,016 $ 771,753,424 $ 789,064,353 $ 805,435,000 

% Actual Collections to Levy 97.80% 97.80% 97.80% 99.00% 99.00% 99.00% 

Tax Rates 

Local Maintenance 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 

Debt Service 0.123 0.148 0.163 0.163 0.163 0.163 

Total 1.202 1.227 1.242 1.242 1.242 1.242 

Budgeted Tax Levies 

Local Maintenance $ 636,316,905 $ 618,338,593 $ 627,373,664 $ 663,763,869 $ 678,652,522 $ 692,732,465 

Debt Service $ 72,536,589 $ 84,813,820 $ 94,774,706 $ 100,272,021 $ 102,521,187 $ 104,648,185 

Total $ 708,853,493 $ 703,152,413 $ 722,148,370 $ 764,035,890 $ 781,173,710 $ 797,380,650 


September 

2012 51

On January 1 of each year, property 

values are rendered for appraisal. 

The appraisal process is conducted 

by the Travis Central Appraisal 

District (TCAD). TCAD is scheduled 

to submit preliminary values to the 

school district by May 1 on an annual 

basis. These values are usually a 

conservative estimate of the ultimate 

certified values that are released on 

or before July 25. Once the certified 

values are received by the district, the 

budget process and tax rate adoption 

can be completed for the upcoming 

school year. The following table is a 

recap of the schedule for certification 

of the appraisal roll and school district 

budget adoption. 

Congress Avenue Bridge, 


Table 31 


Schedule for Certification of the Appraisal Roll 

 

 

 

Estimated Taxable Value Increase Rate – 3.9 percent 

2012 TCAD Certified Taxable Value (AISD FY2013 Budget) - $59.111 billion 

TCAD and AISD Schedule 

January 

January-March 

May 

July 

August 

August 

Rendition Date 

Appraisal Process is conducted by TCAD 

TCAD provides school district preliminary values 

TCAD provides school district certified tax values 

Budget Hearing 

AISD Board adopts budget and tax rate 


September 

2012 52

Where the Money Goes 

AISD continues to ensure that resources are spent primarily on support for schools and students. 

Approximately 59.7 percent of the General Fund revenue is allocated directly towards instruction (shown 

below). A significant portion of AISD’s budget is also spent on maintenance and facilities. General 

Administration represents just 2.5 percent of the General Fund budget. 

General 

Administration 

2.5% 

Guidance & 

Counseling 

Services 2.7% 

Table 32 


FY2013 Adopted Budget by Functional Area (General Fund) 

Data Processing 

Services 2.5% 

Curriculum & Staff 

Development 

2.3% 

Pupil 


3.7% 

School 


6.6% 

Plant 

Maintenance 

10.9% 

Instruction 

59.7% 

Instruction 

School Administration 

Guidance & Counseling Services 

Data Processing Services 

Co-Curricular Activities 

Instructional Administration 

Health Services 

Other Intergovernmental Charges 

Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 

Debt Services 

Plant Maintenance 

Pupil Transportation 

General Administration 

Curriculum & Staff Development 

Instructional Resources & Media Services 

Security & Monitoring Services 

Community Services 

Attendance & Social Work Services 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction 


September 

2012 53

A Comparison of the FY2012 Adopted Budget to the FY2013 Adopted Budget 

General Fund expenditures will decrease $2.5 million or approximately 0.3 percent from the FY2012 

Adopted Budget. The net decrease results from a $14.2 million increase for a nonrecurring employee 

payment allotment to provide the equivalent of a 3 percent increase, a $3 million increase for Annual 

Academic and Facilities Recommendations (AAFRs), $3.8 million increase in strategic plan investments, 

$568,788 in revenue generating or cost avoidance expenditures, $12.3 million increase in baseline and 

statutorily increases, $23.4 million decrease in recapture payments, and $12.9 million in other budget 

reductions. 

General Fund revenue is expected to 

decrease by $29.9 million from the 

FY2012 Adopted Budget. The net 

decrease results from an increase of 

approximately $38.9 million in local 

revenue sources, a decrease of $60 

million in state sources and a decrease 

of $8.7 million in federal sources. The 

decrease in state and federal revenue 

is somewhat offset by an increased 

Certified Local Property Tax Valuation. 

Operating Budget 

When the Chapter 41 payments are excluded from revenue, AISD will retain $696.3 million in operating 

revenue to support district functions for FY2013, as compared to the FY2012 Adopted Budget operating 

revenue of $702.7 million. The decrease in the Chapter 41 expenditure helps offset the large decrease in 

state aid. This represents a decrease of 0.91 percent or $6.4 million in operating revenue for the district in 

FY2013. 


September 

2012 54

Table 33 


General Fund 

Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function and Changes in Fund Balance 


Variance with 

Prior Year 

Budget Positive 

(Negative) 

% Variance with 

Prior Year 

Adopted 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 


Adopted 

Revenues 

Local Sources $ 664,832,840 $ 653,112,865 $ 638,484,837 $ 677,368,777 $ 38,883,940 

6.09% 

State Sources 126,019,476 162,678,023 170,302,248 110,259,107 (60,043,141) -35.26% 

Federal Sources 38,219,854 42,432,291 29,085,672 20,386,584 (8,699,088) -29.9% 

Total Revenues 829,072,170 858,223,179 837,872,757 808,014,468 (29,858,289) -3.56% 

Expenditures by Function 

Current 

Instruction 397,551,020 399,301,376 419,734,596 432,107,452 12,372,856 2.95% 

Instructional Resources & Media Services 12,652,232 12,248,753 11,321,673 10,785,702 (535,971) -4.73% 

Curriculum & Staff Development 16,995,999 14,310,972 16,259,504 16,394,100 134,596 0.83% 

Instructional Administration 10,800,228 9,673,934 9,795,691 10,194,410 398,719 4.07% 

School Administration 46,634,597 46,971,582 46,812,796 47,911,053 1,098,257 2.35% 

Guidance & Counseling Services 19,054,858 19,417,443 18,726,353 19,694,749 968,396 5.17% 

Attendance & Social Work Services 2,893,886 3,040,796 2,970,687 2,906,651 (64,036) -2.16% 

Health Services 5,132,193 5,744,568 5,946,564 6,131,553 184,989 3.11% 

Pupil Transportation 25,474,229 26,441,452 24,488,580 27,109,548 2,620,968 10.70% 

Co-Curricular Activities 14,604,097 14,532,159 13,262,821 13,376,167 113,346 0.85% 

General Administration 17,124,548 16,532,883 17,064,813 18,248,506 1,183,693 6.94% 

Plant Maintenance 80,180,361 77,751,820 77,374,097 79,012,294 1,638,197 2.12% 

Security & Monitoring Services 9,466,965 9,028,580 9,577,526 9,897,984 320,458 3.35% 

Data Processing Services 17,841,016 18,498,506 17,244,095 17,803,638 559,543 3.24% 

Community Services 5,605,139 5,389,892 4,426,066 4,627,381 201,315 4.55% 

Debt Services 1,129,300 1,129,400 1,046,903 877,565 (169,338) -16.18% 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction 2,528,017 2,101,455 1,320,000 1,320,000 - 0.00% 

Contracted Instructional Srvc.-Public Schools 111,937,679 123,774,675 135,176,524 111,739,859 (23,436,665) -17.34% 

Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,700,441 1,658,106 1,233,902 1,658,106 424,204 34.38% 

Other Intergovernmental Charges 3,953,241 4,150,819 4,717,540 4,164,661 (552,879) -11.7% 

Total Expenditures 803,260,046 811,699,171 838,500,731 835,961,379 (2,539,352) -0.3% 

Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over 

Expenditures 

25,812,124 46,524,008 (627,974) (27,946,911) (27,318,937) 

4350.33% 

Other Financing Sources (Uses) 

Other Resources 196,725 80,025 51,000 51,000 - 0.00% 

Other Uses (109,050) (73,387) (81,000) (81,000) - 0.0% 

Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 87,675 6,638 (30,000) (30,000) - 0.0% 

Net Change in Fund Balances 25,899,799 46,530,646 (657,974) (27,976,911) (27,318,937) 4151.98% 


unspent balances at year end 30,064,925 

Fund Balances- September 1 (Beginning) 146,235,297 172,135,096 218,665,742 248,072,693 29,406,951 13.4% 

Fund Balances - August 31 (Ending) 172,135,096 218,665,742 248,072,693 220,095,782 (27,976,911) -11.3% 

Less Assigned Fund Balance (23,808,573) (39,038,247) (48,983,942) (35,530,274) 13,453,668 -27.5% 

Ending Fund Balance - Unassigned 148,326,523 179,627,495 199,088,751 184,565,508 (14,523,243) -7.3% 


Expenditures 

18% 22% 24% 22% 


September 

2012 55


The Food Service Fund accounts for the operation of the district’s cafeteria meal program. The Food 

Service program includes a Food Service Fund expenditure budget of $40.1 million and a Food Service 

Summer Program budget of $682,914 for a total of $40.8 million. 

Revenue to support the Food Service program is generated from local, state and federal sources. Local 

sources account for $8.4 million or 20.9 percent of the total revenue for Food Services. Local sources 

include earnings from investments and fees collected from sales of meals to students and staff for 

breakfast and lunch. 

State sources account for $1.1 million or 2.9 percent of the total revenue for Food Services. They include 

direct financial assistance payments from the TEA. 

Federal sources account for $30.7 million or 76.2 percent of the total revenue for Food Services. The 

National School Lunch Program generates $22.3 million or 72.6 percent of the federal sources. This 

program is administered by the Texas Department of Agriculture which passes monies through the TEA 

to support the school district’s breakfast and lunch programs. 

The Food Service Summer program receives funding from the Department of Human Services, based on 

the average number of daily participants. This program has a budget of $682,914 for both revenue and 

expenditure budgets. 

For the FY2013 school year, the Food Service expenditure budget of $40.8 million exceeds the Food 

Service revenue budget of $40.2 million by an amount of $582,456. The balance of the shortfall will be 

supported from the Food Service reserve funds which will have an ending fund balance of approximately 

$8.2 million. 

Breakfast prices for FY2013 will remain constant from the prior four years. Lunch prices for FY2013 were 

increased slightly from $2.15 to $2.25 for elementary lunch and from $2.30 to $2.40 for secondary lunch. 

AISD is aware the economic downturn still impacts many families in Austin and strives to keep meal 

prices affordable while also maintaining a balanced Food Services budget. 

A Comparison of the FY2012 Adopted Budget to the FY2013 Adopted Budget 

Total Food Services revenue will increase by $1 million from the prior year. Local sources of revenue are 

expected to increase by $166,179 or 2 percent and the state budgeted funding levels will remain the 

same. Federal revenue will increase approximately $844,751 million or 2.8 percent from the FY2013 

Adopted Budget. 

To commensurate with revenue, expenditures will increase $947,514 or 2.4 percent from the prior year 

adopted budget. 


September 

2012 56

Table 34 


Food Service Funds 

Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function and Changes in Fund Balance 


% Variance 

with FY2012 

Adopted 


% Variance 

Recommended 

over Adopted 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 


Adopted 

Revenues 

Local Sources $ 7,827,956 $ 7,624,437 $ 8,226,536 $ 8,392,715 $ 166,179 2.0% 

State Sources 1,063,672 1,125,924 1,146,327 1,146,327 - 0.0% 

Federal Sources 28,338,890 29,610,386 29,831,027 30,675,778 844,751 2.8% 

Total Revenues 37,230,518 38,360,747 39,203,890 40,214,820 1,010,930 2.6% 


Current 

Food Services 35,552,459 37,665,777 38,297,927 39,245,441 947,514 2.5% 

Plant Maintenance 789,975 839,944 1,551,835 1,551,835 - 0.0% 

Total Expenditures 36,342,434 38,505,721 39,849,762 40,797,276 947,514 2.4% 

Excess (Deficiency) of 

Revenues Over Expenditures 

888,084 (144,974) (645,872) (582,456) 63,416 -9.8% 


Other Resources - - - - - - 

Other Uses - - - - - - 

Total Other Financing 

Sources (Uses) 

- - - - - - 

Net Change in Fund 

Balances 

Fund Balances- Sept.1 

(Beginning) 

888,084 (144,974) (645,872) (582,456) 63,416 -9.8% 

8,662,778 9,550,862 9,405,888 8,760,016 (645,872) -6.9% 

Fund Balances - Aug. 31 (Ending) 

$ 9,550,862 $ 9,405,888 $ 8,760,016 $ 8,177,560 $ (582,456) -6.6% 

Ending Fund Balance as a % of 

Total Budget Expenditures 

26% 24% 22% 20% 


September 

2012 57


The Debt Service Fund accounts for all bonded debt payments, including principal, interest and fees. 

Major sources of revenues are from local property taxes levied for bonded debt payment purposes. 

Interest earnings contribute a relatively minor source of additional revenue for this fund. As of the 

beginning of FY2013, excluding commercial paper, the district projects an outstanding debt balance of 

$749.6 million. The district is currently planning to convert $100 million in commercial paper to long term 

fixed debt in January 2013. 

The total revenues and other resources for the Debt Service Fund for FY2013 are $102.3 million and total 

expenditures and other uses are $102.7 million. Debt Service revenues are projected to increase 

approximately $6.9 million from the prior year. The district is anticipating an increase of $5.8 million in 

current year property tax revenues as a result of higher appraised property values and an increased 

collection rate. AISD will spend an additional $14.62 million on bond interest, but $7.8 million less in bond 

principal when compared to the prior year. The budget for the FY2013 Debt Service Fund will have a 

deficit of $462,627. A minimum fund balance of $10 million must be maintained in the Debt Service Funds 

to cover required investments associated with the district’s Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZAB) 

program. In FY2013, the I&S tax rate of 0.163 per $100 of assessed property value will remain 

unchanged from FY2012. By law, the district must set its tax rate at a level that will generate enough 

revenue to cover the debt obligations that are authorized by the voters. Debt service revenues are 

expected to increase $6.9 million, or 7.3 percent and expenditures are expected to increase by $6.8 

million or 7.1 percent as compared to the prior year. 


September 

2012 58

Table 35 



Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function, and Changes in Fund Balance 


FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Variance 

FY2012 and 


Positive 

(Negative) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Positive 

(Negative) 

LOCAL REVENUE SOURCES 

Earnings from Investments $ 284,511 $ 307,657 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ - 0.0% 

Penalty & Interest 377,582 412,842 330,000 400,000 70,000 21.2% 

Taxes- Prior Years 372,885 486,876 325,000 425,000 100,000 30.8% 

Taxes-Current Year 74,389,079 87,334,669 94,505,938 100,272,021 5,766,083 6.1% 

Total Revenues from Local Sources 75,424,057 88,542,044 95,360,938 101,297,021 5,936,083 6.2% 

FEDERAL REVENUE SOURCES 

Building America Bond Subsidy - 886,020 - 984,466 984,466 - 

Total Revenues from Federal Sources - 886,020 - 984,466 984,466 - 

TOTAL REVENUE 75,424,057 89,428,064 95,360,938 102,281,487 6,920,549 7.3% 

EXPENDITURES 

Bond Principal 45,112,633 52,617,633 58,697,347 50,898,305 (7,799,042) -13.3% 

Bond Interest 34,671,258 35,122,926 36,148,032 50,770,809 14,622,777 40.5% 

Other Debt Serv Fees 418,768 893,547 1,075,000 1,075,000 - 0.0% 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 80,202,659 88,634,106 95,920,379 102,744,114 6,823,735 7.1% 

NET REVENUE OVER (UNDER) (4,778,602) 793,958 (559,441) (462,627) 96,814 -17.3% 

OTHER SOURCES 

Premium/Discount on Bonds - - - - - 

Prepaid Interest - - - - - 

Sale of Bonds - - - - - 

Other Uses 112,393 - - - - 

TOTAL OTHER SOURCES 112,393 - - - - - 

NET REVENUE SOURCES OVER (UNDER) (4,666,209) 793,958 (559,441) (462,627) 96,814 -17.3% 

BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 25,271,334 20,605,125 21,399,083 20,839,642 (559,441) -2.6% 

ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 20,605,125 $ 21,399,083 $ 20,839,642 $ 20,377,015 $ (462,627) -2.2% 


Expenditures 

26% 24% 22% 20% 


September 

2012 59

Capital Projects Fund 

Appropriations for the Capital Projects Fund are not incorporated into the official FY2013 Adopted 

Budget. The Adopted Budget is reviewed and approved by the Board of Trustees, while the funding for 

capital projects is approved by Austin voters. However, the capital projects have a significant dollar value 

and are an integral part of the district’s operations. Data on capital projects are being presented for 

informational purposes only. 

The Capital Projects Fund generally encompasses projects that are financed through the issuance of 

school building bonds, subject to approval by voters. Some examples of Capital Project Fund 

expenditures include: 

Purchase sites for school buildings 

Acquisition, construction, renovation, rehabilitation and improvement of school buildings 

Purchase of new school buses 

Equipping school buildings (furniture, fixtures, and equipment) 

The Apple at Work Bond Program 

Austin voters in September 2004 gave their overwhelming approval to a five-year, $519.5 million school 

bond program to alleviate overcrowding, keep up with Austin's growth, and improve the quality, safety and 

sustainability of Austin ISD's campuses and facilities. The vast majority of these capital projects have 

been completed. 

In May 2008, Austin voters approved a $343.7 million bond initiative for capital projects, which will be 

implemented over a four year period. This voter approval enables the district to increase the I&S tax rate 

to a maximum of $0.170 per $100 assessed value. The FY2013 I&S tax rate is currently $0.163 per $100 

of assessed value. 

The district is contemplating the capital project needs for a new bond program, possibly in 2013. 

Table 36 


2008 Bond Initiative Capital Projects 

$82,000,000 

23.9% 

Special 

Programs and 

Expansion 

Health, Safety, 

Environment, 

Critical 

Renovations, 

and Other 

District Needs 

Relief for 

Overcrowding, 

Growth and 

Support for 

Academic 

Achievement 

$187,797,315 

54.6% 

$73,920,504 

21.5% 


September 

2012 60

Table 37 



Campus/Department 

FY2009 

Actual 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Actual and 

Remaining 




Akins High additions and renovations 430,843 2,785,554 1,078,859 92,132 102,596 

Austin High additions and renovations 397,097 6,897,701 1,342,390 417,609 308,711 

New Baldwin Elementary 2,679,664 13,306,899 611,653 174,595 125,703 

Barrington Elementary additions and renovations 357,475 2,585,053 82,246 136,579 51,109 

Bedichek Middle additions and renovations 3,831,466 288,360 102,923 62,967 67,268 

Bowie High science classrooms and renovations 571,670 3,074,674 238,064 137,774 167,910 

Burnet Middle renovations and improvements 2,216,908 254,698 71,760 13,278 69,650 

Construction Management 22,107,604 36,363,704 17,862,064 18,325,980 16,049,675 

Crockett High science classrooms and renovations 200,881 1,783,944 398,741 126,369 166,956 

Doss Elementary renovations and improvements 1,597,644 202,407 287,321 115,980 116,092 

Eastside Memorial renovations and improvements 3,241,195 1,926,638 237,317 402,261 203,919 

New Gorzycki Middle School 23,375,165 1,014,909 210,818 65,504 8,329 

Graham Elementary additions and renovations - 12,384 - - 48,049 

Hart Elementary additions and renovations 346,137 2,195,364 314,213 32,813 50,417 

Information System Admin upgrades 10,605,207 6,785,094 23,878,135 9,862,871 1,836,412 

L C Anderson High additions and renovations 1,736,450 8,948,432 2,844,526 465,205 169,290 

Langford Elementary additions and renovations 721,161 2,768,911 129,975 133,628 58,010 

Lanier High additions and renovations 3,943,228 1,432,769 4,250,939 2,712,277 282,756 

New Uphaus Early Childhood Center 155,464 1,149,513 2,373,251 11,880,026 4,351,662 

McCallum High additions and renovations 778,526 4,936,654 8,190,791 95,041 99,606 

Network Support Group technology upgrades 3,136,024 976,479 2,744,373 48,733 1,510,104 

New Performing Arts Center 698,417 8,292 6,579 5,147,664 17,201,184 

New Bus Terminal 62,891 9,960 - 2,414,622 1,801,387 

New buses and equipment - - - 105 - 

New North Central Elementary - - - 1,486,071 14,695,581 

New South High School Land - - - - 20,000,000 

New Undesignated North Central Elementary #2 3,796,922 11,876,871 

Warehouse additions and renovations 4,975,183 5,798,621 4,853,796 3,140,360 48,049 

Webb Middle additions and renovations 4,338,214 512,845 304,190 1,253,476 848,855 

Wooldridge Elementary additions and renovations 2,615,793 524,237 7,557 13,852 51,579 

Grand Total $ 95,120,304 $ 106,544,096 $ 72,422,480 $ 62,554,694 $ 92,367,730 


September 

2012 61

Grant Funds 

In addition to the previously discussed Governmental Funds, Austin ISD receives grant funds from a 

variety of sources. Grant funds have strict provisions and are generally restricted for a specific purpose. 

The district may not use these funds for anything other than what is listed in the Notice of Grant Award 

(NOGA). Grants have varying time spans. Some grants may be received on an annual basis, while other 

grants may be for multiple years for a specific project or program. 

Federal Grants 

Title I Grants are the largest source of grant funds for the district. Title I funding is intended to provide 

additional funding to schools with high numbers or percentages of children from low-income families. It is 

estimated AISD will receive more than $31.5 million in Title I funds during the FY2013 school year. Five 

high schools, 11 middle schools and 50 elementary schools in the district will receive Title I funding. 

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides funding to assist states and local 

educational agencies to educate students with disabilities. IDEA grants are the next largest source of 

grant funding for the district. It is estimated AISD will be awarded approximately $18.1 million for FY2013. 

The district projects it will receive $4.5 million from the federally funded Title II, Teacher & Principal 

Training and Recruiting Grant; $3.72 million from the Title III, Part A English Language Acquisitions and 

Language Enhancement Grant; and $3.5 million from the Title IV, 21st Century Community Learning 

Centers Grant. The 21st Century Grant supports the creation of community learning centers to provide 

academic enrichment opportunities during non-school hours for children who attend high-poverty and lowperforming 

schools. 

It is estimated the district will receive $1.3 million from the Career and Technical Basic Grant, which is 

also federally funded. This grant provides funding for secondary and post-secondary career and technical 

education programs. 

AISD received $13.8 million from the federal Edujobs Grant in FY2012. Unfortunately, this grant was 

meant to be a one-year infusion of revenue, and AISD will not be granted any additional Edujobs Grant 

revenue in FY2013. The Edujobs Grant helped support full-day pre-kindergarten, provided an additional 

planning period at the secondary level and funded school librarian salaries. The loss of these funds will 

shift these expenditures to the General Fund. 

Sequestration and Federal Grant Funding 

On May 29, 2012, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) informed Austin ISD of the possibility that all 

federal grants administered by the TEA may be reduced for the FY2013 school and grant year by an 

amount ranging from 8 to 14 percent. However, on July 25, 2012, the TEA issued new guidance from the 

U.S. Department of Education. The process by which this reduction may take place, known as 

sequestration, is a provision of the Budget Control Act of 2011. If Congress fails to take action by January 

2, 2013, federal education spending will be cut for the FY2014 school and grant year. Instead of taking of 

sequestered funds from the FY2013 school year appropriations as communicated on May 29, 2012, the 

funds will now be sequestered from the funds that will be available in July 2013 for the FY2014 school 

year. 


September 

2012 62

Table 38 


Grant Funding from Federal Sources 

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Grant 


Revenues 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 



Projected 

$ Variance 

from FY2012 

to FY2013 

% Variance 

from FY2012 


5900 Federal Sources 

Title I $ 23,704,800 $ 28,425,229 $ 30,971,538 $ 31,799,055 $ 827,517 3% 

IDEA Grant 16,190,755 12,572,034 15,149,310 19,499,577 4,350,267 35% 

Title II 4,002,130 3,951,933 3,237,133 3,130,006 (107,127) -3% 

Title III 3,103,982 2,078,002 2,671,603 2,321,953 (349,650) -17% 

Title IV 3,644,626 3,227,128 1,982,630 3,461,630 1,479,000 46% 

Career and Technical - Basic Grant 1,279,638 1,248,132 1,189,683 1,051,743 (137,940) -11% 

Total Federal Revenues 

$ 51,925,931 $ 51,502,458 $ 55,201,897 $ 61,263,964 $ 6,062,067 12% 

Expenditures 

By Function 

11 Instruction 29,451,153 30,624,428 33,612,298 34,703,005 1,090,707 4% 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 229,087 720,003 112,412 204,801 92,389 13% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 4,845,749 5,404,606 7,267,785 9,801,868 2,534,083 47% 

21 Instructional Administration 3,257,340 1,986,780 2,358,625 2,040,461 (318,164) -16% 

23 School Administration 1,575,776 2,089,877 1,842,176 2,417,416 575,240 28% 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 5,472,251 4,172,702 4,203,337 4,130,138 -73,199 -2% 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 836,903 893,364 1,059,809 345,794 (714,015) -80% 

33 Health Services 232,943 148,569 155,549 88,360 (67,189) -45% 

34 Pupil Transportation 349,036 171,815 250,000 700,000 450,000 262% 

35 Food Services 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 65,206 45,163 64,677 313,480 248,803 551% 

41 General Administration 221,108 241,651 288,963 285,599 (3,364) -1% 

51 Plant Maintenance 27,569 21,686 45,676 27,035 (18,641) -86% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 28,198 3,298 6,200 13,610 7,410 225% 

53 Data Processing Services 643,932 721,534 571,664 942,998 371,334 51% 

61 Community Services 4,689,680 4,256,982 3,362,726 5,249,399 1,886,673 44% 

71 Debt Services 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

91 Contracted Instructional Srvcs-Public Schools 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

93 Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

Total Expenditures $ 51,925,931 $ 51,502,458 $ 55,201,897 $ 61,263,964 6,062,067 10% 

*Note: This table provides the Federal Grant information at the time of print. The district is awarded varying amounts each year and 

varies depending on the student population. 


September 

2012 63

Corporate and Philanthropic Partnership Support 

Despite the recent economic downturn, numerous corporate and philanthropic partners continue to help 

AISD achieve exemplary results with our students, parents and families. Partners help by providing direct 

financial support, by supporting community partners who work with students in our schools and by giving 

hundreds of volunteer hours directly to our schools and through our volunteer organization, Austin 

Partners in Education. 

In AISD, our strategic partners help teachers and schools address important issues that can impede 

student learning. Support from partners improves the overall climate in the school and district for learning 

and prepares all students to be ready for college, career and life. 

However, AISD continues to anticipate an increasingly strained financial landscape in education, facing 

potentially unprecedented cuts in the next five years. We anticipate the need to secure $30 million in 

external private funding over the next three years to continue to provide new delivery models, improve the 

overall school and district climate for learning and develop academic achievement and support strategies 

for special populations through accelerated and differentiated instruction. Without the direct financial and 

volunteer support that partners provide, AISD will not be able to continue to provide new delivery models, 

improve the overall school and district climate for learning and develop academic achievement and 

support strategies for special populations through accelerated and differentiated instruction. AISD 

appreciates those partners who have invested with a long-term view and welcome others who may want 

to join us in creating an exceptional educational experience. 

In FY2010, a Comprehensive Resource Development Needs Assessment, which surveyed 1,000 district 

staff and external partners, showed that the district is poised for a partnership and investment 

renaissance if it can leverage its relationship strengths, reduce confusion and duplication of effort and 

improve shared accountability. 

To meet this need, AISD established the Office of Innovation and Development (IAD) to provide a 

centralized location for partner support for external resource development. IAD brings significant new 

external resources to the school district to support initiatives deemed crucial to the progress of the district, 

creating a coherent and strategic infrastructure to bring in the highest possible yield of both public and 

private funds to enable the district to carry out its Strategic Plan. 

IAD now provides resource development and management supports and services to district, campus and 

individual staff and external partners including: 

 

 

 

 

Creating opportunities to share innovative program investments with external partners 

Identifying and sharing funding opportunities 

Facilitating and writing strategic funding proposals 

Providing technical assistance for grant writing and grant management, trainings, workshops and 

individual professional development opportunities, and access to online funding resources. 

The Office of Innovation and Development (IAD) has submitted more than $14.7 million in grants to date, 

and has been awarded approximately $6.9 million to date (many grants are still pending). IAD has also 

seen a 50 percent growth in partnerships over the past year. 


September 

2012 64

Partners 

Building strategic partnerships and creating district-wide priorities allows the district to provide new 

delivery models, duplicate best practices and accelerate effective programming. AISD’s Office of 

Innovation and Development is proud to work with the following partners who are active participants in the 

district’s growth: 

3M Foundation 

Applied Materials 

Austin Chamber of Commerce 

Buena Vista Foundation 

City of Austin 

E3 Alliance 

Bill & Melinda 

Gates Foundation 

Google 

HEB 

IBM 

Intel 

KDK Harman Foundation 

Kennedy Center 

KLE Foundation 

Klein Family Foundation 

Matt Foundation 

Michael & Susan 

Dell Foundation (MSDF) 

Moody Foundation 

Mueller Foundation 

National Instruments 

NoVo Foundation 

RGK Foundation 

Seedling Foundation 

Seton Family of Hospitals 

Skillpoint Alliance 

Sooch Foundation 

St. David’s Foundation 

Tapestry Foundation 

Target 

Teacher Heaven 

Time Warner Cable 

United Way–Capital Area 

Univision 

Wells Fargo 

Whole Foods 


September 

2012 65

Enrollment Growth 

Austin ISD’s total enrollment continues to grow each year with the number of economically disadvantaged 

and English language learner students growing notably, from 49 percent to 64 percent, and 13 percent to 

29 percent, respectively, from FY1998 to FY2011. These changing demographic trends, as well as 

others, will continue to impact the district for many years. Planning for this growth adds complexity to the 

district’s planning process. For example, there are fewer families with children in the central urban core of 

the city, yet there has been continued growth in the far southern portion of the district. Additional 

examples include: 

 

 

With approximately 87,000 students, AISD is expected to grow by approximately 612 students 

from FY2012 to FY2013. In contrast of the previous year, it is projected there will be an increase 

in high school (+735). It is projected there will be a decrease in primary grades (-105) and in 

middle school grades (-18). The special campus enrollment is projected to be the same as in the 

prior year. 

Increasing births over the last 10 years point to continued elementary growth. 

Increasingly large kindergarten classes over the last six years (growing from 7,313 to 7,819) 

points to continued elementary growth. 

94,000 

92,000 

90,000 

88,000 

86,000 

84,000 

82,000 

80,000 

78,000 

76,000 

78,759 

78,408 

79,896 

Table 39 


Student Enrollment History and Projections 

81,295 

82,063 

82,739 

83,033 

88,978 

86,724 87,336 

85,273 

84,245 


Est 

FY2014 

Est 

90,186 

FY2015 

Est 

91,777 

FY2016 

Est 

93,140 

FY2017 

Est 


September 

2012 66

Staffing 

The Austin ISD staffing formulas/guidelines were amended in FY2012 to help close the district’s projected 

FY2012 and FY2013 budget shortfalls. Personnel costs comprise almost 87 percent of the district’s 

operating expenditure budget. Staffing formulas create the foundation on which school budgets are built. 

Table 40 


Five-Year Staffing History 

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 

Actual % Actual % Actual % Budgeted % Budgeted % 

Teachers 

(Includes regular elementary, 

secondary, and special program 

teachers) 

Campus Administration 

(Includes principals, assistant 

principals, and academy directors) 

Central Administration 

(Includes superintendent, chiefs, 

associate/assistant superintendents, 

executive directors, and directors) 

5,889 52.0% 5,976 51.6% 6,104 52.2% 5,714 51.2% 5,974 52.0% 

424 3.7% 449 3.9% 458 3.9% 449 4.0% 456 4.0% 

73 0.6% 76 0.7% 76 0.6% 75 0.7% 75 0.7% 

Professional Support 

(Includes counselors, librarians, 

instructional/curriculum specialists, 

therapists, assistant directors, 

supervisors, coordinators, athletic 

trainers, etc.) 

Auxiliary Staff 

(Includes non classroom 

paraprofessional, bus drivers, hourly 

employees, and other) 

963 8.5% 978 8.5% 970 8.3% 965 8.7% 951 8.3% 

3,137 27.7% 3,226 27.9% 3,230 27.6% 3,101 27.8% 3,146 27.4% 

Educational Aides 

(Includes regular and special 

programs paraprofessionals working 

in classrooms to assist teachers) 

837 7.4% 866 7.5% 856 7.3% 847 7.6% 886 7.7% 

Total 11,322 11,571 11,694 11,151 11,488 

Student Enrollment 83,033 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 

Staffing Ratios 

Student/Teacher Ratio 14.10 14.10 13.97 15.18 14.62 

Student/Total Staff Ratio 7.33 7.28 7.29 7.78 7.60 

Note: Information in the FY2009 through FY2011 columns is actual data from the AEIS (Academic Excellence 

Indicator System) of TEA, whereas information in FY2012 and FY2013 columns are budgeted numbers. 


September 

2012 67

Salaries & Benefits 

The largest single component of a school district’s operating budget is salary and benefit expenditures. 

AISD’s payroll expenditures consume nearly 87 percent of the General Fund budget for FY2013 when 

Chapter 41 is excluded. As part of a multi-year strategy, the district adjusted the staffing 

formulas/guidelines, declared financial exigency and enacted a reduction in force in FY2012 in an effort to 

reduce the largest budgeted expenditure. 

Table 41 


Budget Comparison Excluding Chapter 41 by Percent (General Fund) 

FY2013 General Fund excluding Chapter 41 

Salaries 

86.61% 

Capital 

Outlay 

0.02% 

Debt Service 

0.12% 

Other Operating 

Expenses 

0.93% 

Supplies & 

Materials 

3.79% 

Contracted 

Services 

8.53% 

Future Year Budget Projections 

Uncertainty for the 2013 Legislative Session 

The next few budget cycles may prove challenging for AISD. The 83rd Texas Legislature will convene in 

2013, and with that comes increased work for district staff and increased uncertainty about the district’s 

financial standing. Legislators addressed state budget shortfalls during the 2011 session by applying 

funding cuts to school districts. High- target-revenue districts, like AISD, faced a much larger share of the 

funding reductions, while some districts received small funding cuts or none at all. It is projected state aid 

will decrease $59.1 million for FY2013 from HB3646 funding levels to SB1 funding levels. 

Additionally, the legislature adopted a goal of working toward complete elimination of State Aid for Tax 

Reduction (also referred to as target revenue) by FY2018. Complete elimination of this funding source for 

AISD would constitute a loss of about $150 million. Unless wholesale changes are made to the school 

finance system, AISD can expect significant cuts in the coming years. 


September 

2012 68

Local Economic Recovery 

Austin is often publicized as one of the 

premier cities leading the national economic 

recovery. Austin is one of the top-performing 

metro areas in business-cycle performance, 

employment rates and construction permits. 

Austin has experienced 2.5 percent 

employment growth from February 2011 to 

February 2012 compared to 2.0 percent 

growth in Texas, and 1.9 percent growth in 

the United States during the same period. 

The population of Austin is growing and that 

trend is expected to continue. National news 

reports suggest several factors account for 

the emergence of Austin and Texas as 

recovery leaders, among them: 

 

 

 

 

 

Austin’s position as a capital city and 

center for higher learning. The University 

of Texas at Austin and state government 

provide greater economic stability than in 

other places. 

Austin’s role as the leading technology 

center outside of California. 

Texas’ largely recession-proof energy industry. 

Texas didn’t see the same spikes in home prices or unchecked real estate speculation that led to a 

decrease in housing prices elsewhere. 

Texas’ increasing role as a global economic powerhouse. 

The Texas economy also continues to improve. Several of the economic indicators continue to suggest 

that Texas is on a stable path and will continue to recover over the next few years. 

While there has been improvement, we need to maintain realistic expectations. The Travis County Chief 

Tax Appraiser expects property values to stabilize in 2012 with moderate growth in 2013. If state aid 

continues to decline, inflation creates baseline expenditure (fuel, utilities, materials, etc.) increases and 

student enrollment continues to increase, Austin ISD will not be able to maintain current expenditure 

levels in the future. 


September 

2012 69

Table 42 


Future Budget Projections for General Fund 

FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 

Actual Adopted Adopted Projected Projected 

Revenues $ 858,223,179 $ 837,872,757 $ 808,014,468 $ 833,501,377 $ 849,083,011 

Expenditures (811,699,171) (838,500,731) (835,961,379) (866,531,707) (885,319,655) 

Net 46,524,008 (627,974) (27,946,911) (33,030,330) (36,236,644) 

Other Sources 80,025 51,000 51,000 51,000 51,000 

Other Uses (73,387) (81,000) (81,000) (81,000) (81,000) 

Net Other Sources (Uses) 6,638 (30,000) (30,000) (30,000) (30,000) 

Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance 46,530,646 (657,974) (27,976,911) (33,060,330) (36,266,644) 

Estimated outstanding purchase orders 

and unspent balances at year end 30,064,925 

Beginning Fund Balance (Estimated) 172,135,096 218,665,742 248,072,693 220,095,782 187,035,452 


Less Assigned Balance (39,038,247) (48,983,942) (35,530,274) (35,000,000) (35,000,000) 


22% 24% 22% 18% 13% 

Assumptions: 

1. The Foundation School Program (FSP) entitles AISD and all school districts in Texas to provide 

basic education for each student. The 82 nd Texas Legislature applied funding cuts in SB1 to 

address state budget shortfalls; subsequently, Austin ISD lost a total of $96.6 million this fiscal 

biennium. It is anticipated that the 2013 legislative session will enact more changes in state 

funding formulas, which may impact the district’s FSP for the next biennium, FY2014 and 

FY2015. But, it is difficult to speculate future state cuts and apply in forecast models. 

2. The district shall maintain an unassigned fund balance sufficiently adequate for fiscal cash 

liquidity purposes (i.e., fiscal reserve) to provide for sufficient cash flow to minimize the potential 

of short-term tax anticipation borrowing. This amount shall be equal to but not less than 14 

percent of the combined budgeted expenditures of the district General Fund. 

3. The FY2013 and future year M&O tax rate projections are based on the current adopted rate of 

$1.079 per $100 of assessed taxable value. If voters approved an increase to the M&O tax rate in 

a tax ratification election, projected revenues for future years would increase. 


September 

2012 70

Summary 

While the district has had to make some difficult budgetary decisions to manage during this tough fiscal 

climate, it is in no way free from the financial turbulence that is affecting us all. The need to stay 

competitive with surrounding school districts by maintaining and expanding its highly qualified workforce 

will require the district to implement a multi-year compensation strategy that necessitates additional 

revenue. In addition, further state cuts in education funding could be forthcoming. And while the district is 

has been able to stabilize the budget, new revenue will be needed to address these issues. 

Because AISD is a Chapter 41 district, the only ways to substantially increase revenue is to increase the 

number of students and their attendance rates, and to increase the property tax rate. The district only 

nominally benefits from rising appraisal values due to this funding formula structure. So in order to do 

both, the district will need to continually educate and engage the public if it is going to be successful when 

it asks voters to approve a rate increase through a tax ratification election. 

AISD will continue to work with our partners to secure additional funding for Strategic Plan priorities. The 

district will continue to efficiently align our resources, financial and non-financial with our Strategic Plan – 

the Power of Us, ensuring every child in every school is on track to graduate, ready for college, career 

and life in a globally competitive economy. 


September 

2012 71

This Page Intentionally Left Blank 


September 

2012 72


Organization


School Districts in the Surrounding Area 

Austin is located within the Travis County of Texas. Travis County comprises seven school districts 

including Austin, Del Valle, Eanes, Lago Vista, Lake Travis, Manor and Pflugerville; Austin School District 

is the largest one with a student population of approximately 87,000. Statewide, Austin ISD is the fifth 

largest school district in Texas. 

Austin ISD has 119 regular campuses composed of 17 high schools, 18 middle schools and 84 

elementary schools. The district has 10 special campuses, for a total of 129 campuses. The district 

provides a comprehensive range of educational opportunities appropriate for grade levels prekindergarten 

through twelve. These include basic and enriched academic programs such as magnet 

schools, special education, compensatory education, vocational education, English as a Second 

Language, a dual language program, two science/environmental learning centers, three agricultural farms 

and adult education. 


September 

2012 73

Austin ISD - District Boundaries 


September 

2012 74

Overview of Austin Independent School District 

Austin is one of the fastest-growing cities in the state and in the nation. Austin ISD is the fifth largest 

school district in Texas and the 37th largest district in the United States. It serves the City of Austin, 

Texas, which has a population of approximately 790,390 according to the latest decennial 2010 U.S. 

Census Bureau statistics. The Census Bureau estimates the Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) 

has a population of 1,716,289 and projects this number to increase by 33.9 percent to 2,292,737 by 2020. 

There are approximately 87,000 students enrolled in Austin ISD and the students are reflective of the 

diverse population. The boundaries of AISD include most of the City of Austin and much of Travis County. 

Of the 29 public school districts in the MSA, AISD is the largest, followed by Round Rock, Leander, 

Pflugerville, Hays, Georgetown, Bastrop, Del Valle, San Marcos, and Eanes. AISD is one of the largest 

employers in the area. Other large employers include the State of Texas, the University of Texas at 

Austin, Dell, the City of Austin, the Federal government, the Seton Family of Hospitals, St. David’s 

Healthcare partnership, IBM Corporation and Freescale Semiconductor. 

Austin built its first publicly funded school in 1876, but the majority of Austinites remained indifferent 

toward public education. The city’s numerous private schools continued to dominate the educational 

landscape for nearly fifty years. 

Enrollment continues to increase at Austin ISD. For the FY2013 school year, enrollment is projected to be 

87,336, an increase of 612 students over the prior year. The demographic analysis and enrollment 

projections indicate in the years ahead, an increase of approximately 25,000 students is possible. 

Elementary schools could increase by 13,000, middle schools by 5,000, and high schools by 7,000. 

Table 43 


Enrollment History 

Level FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 

High 19,986 20,084 19,878 20,536 21,271 

Middle 15,432 15,582 15,557 16,312 16,294 

Elementary 46,787 47,821 49,297 49,374 49,269 

Special Campus 828 758 541 502 502 

Total 83,033 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 


September 

2012 75

Table 44 


Student Ethnicity Percentages 

Ethnicity FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

African American 11.7% 11.3% 9.5% 9.1% 

Asian/Pacific Islanders 3.4% 3.7% 3.3% 3.3% 

Hispanic 58.8% 58.9% 60.3% 60.5% 

Native American 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 

White 25.8% 25.8% 24.3% 24.4% 

Other 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 2.4% 

The changing demographics 

of Austin ISD are reflected in 

the table above. Historical 

data over the last five years 

indicate the White and African 

American student groups were 

shrinking, the Hispanic student 

groups were growing, and the 

Asian/Pacific Islander and 

Native American student 

group populations remained 

relatively flat. 

Hispanic 

60.5% 

Asian/Pacific 

Islanders 

3.3% 

African 

American 

9.1% 

White 

24.4% 

Other 

2.4% 

Native 

American 

0.3% 

Campus Listing 

High Schools Address Phone No. 

Akins High School 10701 South 1st Street, Austin TX 78748 512-841-9925 

Anderson High School 8403 Mesa Drive, Austin, TX 78759 512-414-2538 

Anne Richards SYWL 2206 Prather Lane, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3236 

Austin High School 1715 W. Cesar Chavez, Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7200 

Bowie High School 4103 Slaughter Lane, Austin, TX 78749 512-414-7301 

Crockett High School 5601 Manchaca Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-841-7806 

Eastside Memorial High School 1012 Arthur Stiles, Austin, TX 78721 512-414-2303 

International High School 1012 Arthur Stiles, Austin, TX 78721 512-414-0791 

Lanier High School 1201 Peyton Gin Road W. Austin, TX 78758 512-414-7452 

LASA - Liberal Arts & Science Academy 7309 Lazy Creek Drive, Austin, TX 78724 512-414-7095 

LBJ Comprehensive HS 7309 Lazy Creek Drive, Austin, TX 78724 512-414-4051 

McCallum High School 5600 Sunshine Drive, Austin, TX 78756 512-414-7501 

Premier High School at Lanier In-district 

Charter School 1201 Peyton Gin Road W. Austin, TX 78758 512-886-6878 

Premier High School at Travis In-district 

Charter School 1211 E. Oltorf, Austin, TX 78704 512-809-2819 

Reagan High School 7104 Berkman Drive, Austin, TX 78752 512-414-6570 

Travis High School 1211 E. Oltorf, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-7789 


September 

2012 76

Campus Listing (continued) 

Middle Schools Address Phone No. 

Bailey Middle School 4020 Lost Oasis Hollow, Austin, TX 78739 512-414-5410 

Bedichek Middle School 6800 Bill Hughes Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5180 

Burnet Middle School 8401 Hathaway, Austin, TX 78757 512-414-4200 

Covington Middle School 3700 Convict Hill Road, Austin, TX 78749 512-414-5370 

Dobie Middle School (PK-8) 1200 E. Rundberg Lane, Austin, TX 78753 512-414-4360 

Fulmore Middle School 201 East Mary, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3430 

Garcia Middle School 7414 Johnny Morris Road, Austin, TX 78724 512-841-9405 

Gorzycki Middle School 7412 Slaughter Lane, Austin, TX 78749 512-841-8600 

IDEA Allan In-District Charter School 4900 Gonzales, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-6120 

Kealing Middle School 1607 Pennsylvania Ave., Austin, TX 78702 512-414-2410 

Lamar Middle School 6201 Wynona, Austin, TX 78757 512-414-4507 

Martin Middle School 1601 Haskell, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3100 

Mendez Middle School 5106 Village Square, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-3510 

Murchsion Middle School 3700 North Hills Drive, Austin, TX 78731 512-414-4516 

O. Henry Middle School 2610 West 10th Street, Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7100 

Paredes Middle School 1100 S. Mary Moore Searight Dr, Austin, TX 78748 512-841-6825 

Pearce Middle School 6401 N. Hampton Drive, Austin, TX 78723 512-414-5002 

Small Middle School 4801 Monterey Oaks Blvd., Austin, TX 78749 512-841-6705 

Webb Middle School (PK-8) 601 E. Street Johns, Austin, TX 78752 512-414-4170 

Elementary Schools Address Phone No. 

Allan Elementary (Pre-K Program) 4900 Gonzales, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3130 

Allison Elementary 515 Vargas Road, Austin, TX 78741 512-414-1058 

Andrews Elementary 6801 Northeast Drive, Austin, TX 78723 512-414-5657 

Baldwin Elementary 12200 Meridian Park Blvd. Austin, TX 78739 512-841-8900 

Baranoff Elementary 12009 Buckingham Gate Rd, Austin, TX 78723 512-841-7105 

Barrington Elementary 400 Cooper Drive, Austin, TX 78753 512-414-4601 

Barton Hills Elementary 2108 Barton Hills Drive, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3330 

Becker Elementary 906 W. Milton., Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3460 

Blackshear Elementary 1712 East 11th Street, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-2760 

Blanton Elementary 5408 Westminster Drive, Austin, TX 78723 512-414-4615 

Blazier Elementary 8601 Nuckols Crossing, Austin, TX 78744 512-841-8800 

Boone Elementary 8101 Croftwood Drive., Austin, TX 78749 512-414-5311 

Brentwood Elementary 6700 Arroyo Seco., Austin, TX 78757 512-414-4330 

Brooke Elementary 3100 East 4th Street, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3106 

Brown Elementary 505 W. Anderson., Austin, TX 78752 512-414-4280 

Bryker Woods Elementary 3309 Kerbey Lane, Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7159 

Campbell Elementary 2613 Rogers Ave., Austin, TX 78722 512-414-2775 

Casey Elementary 9400 Texas Oaks Drive, Austin, TX 78748 512-841-6911 

Casis Elementary 2710 Exposition Blvd., Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7160 

Clayton Elementary 7525 La Crosse Ave, Austin, TX 78739 512-841-9205 


September 

2012 77



Cook Elementary 1511 Cripple Creek., Austin, TX 78758 512-414-2506 

Cowan Elementary 2817 Kentish Drive, Austin, TX 78748 512-841-2750 

Cunningham Elementary 2200 Berkely Ave., Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5130 

Davis Elementary 5214 Duval Road., Austin, TX 78727 512-414-4134 

Dawson Elementary 3001 South 1st Street, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3380 

Doss Elementary 7005 Northledge, Austin, TX 78731 512-414-4150 

Galindo Elementary 3800 S. 2nd, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-1759 

Govalle Elementary 3601 Govalle Ave., Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3750 

Graham Elementary 11211 Tom Adams Drive, Austin, TX 78753 512-414-4071 

Gullett Elementary 6310 Treadwell Blvd., Austin, TX 78757 512-414-2740 

Harris Elementary 1711 Wheeless Lane, Austin, TX 78723 512-414-4644 

Hart Elementary 8301 Furness Drive, Austin, TX 78753 512-841-2101 

Highland Park Elementary 4900 Fairview, Austin, TX 78731 512-414-1300 

Hill Elementary 8601 Tallwood Drive, Austin, TX 78759 512-414-4270 

Houston Elementary 5409 Ponciana Drive, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-3560 

IDEA Allan In-District Charter School 4900 Gonzales, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-2304 

Jordan Elementary 6711 Johnny Morris Road, Austin, TX 78724 512-414-2583 

Joslin Elementary 4500 Manchaca Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5230 

Kiker Elementary 5913 La Crosse Ave., Austin, TX 78739 512-414-5350 

Kocurek Elementary 9800 Curlew Drive, Austin, TX 78748 512-414-5290 

Langford Elementary 2206 Blue Meadow, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-2064 

Lee Elementary 3308 Hampton Road. Austin, TX 78705 512-414-1117 

Linder Elementary 2800 Metcalf Road, Austin, TX 78741 512-414-3720 

Maplewood Elementary 3808 Maplewood Ave., Austin, TX 78722 512-414-1090 

Mathews Elementary 906 West Lynn, Austin, TX 78703 512-414-7150 

McBee Elementary 1001 West Braker Lane, Austin, TX 78758 512-841-2549 

Menchaca Elementary 12120 Manchaca Road, Austin, TX 78748 512-414-5330 

Metz Elementary 84 Robert T. Martinez, Jr., Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3090 

Mills Elementary 6200 Davis Lane, Austin, TX 78749 512-841-2406 

Norman Elementary 4001 Tannehill Lane, Austin, TX 78721 512-414-3160 

Oak Hill Elementary 6101 Patton Ranch Road, Austin, TX 78735 512-414-5140 

Oak Springs Elementary 3601 Webberville Road, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-1099 

Odom Elementary 1010 Turtle Creek Blvd., Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5280 

Ortega Elementary 1135 Garland Ave., Austin, TX 78721 512-414-3140 

Overton Elementary 7201 Colony Loop Drive, Austin, TX 78724 512-841-9305 

Palm Elementary 7601 Dixie Drive, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-3407 

Patton Elementary 6001 Westcreek Drive, Austin, TX 78749 512-414-1705 

Pease Elementary 1106 Rio Grande, Austin, TX 78701 512-414-2015 

Pecan Springs Elementary 3100 Rogge Lane, Austin, TX 78723 512-414- 4020 

Perez Elementary 7500 S. Pleasant Valley Rd, Austin, TX 78744 512-841-9105 


September 

2012 78



Pickle Elementary 1101 Wheatley Drive, Austin, TX 78752 512-841-8401 

Pillow Elementary 3025 Crosscreek Drive, Austin, TX 78758 512-414-4307 

Pleasant Hill Elementary 6405 Circle S Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5170 

Read Pre-K 2608 Rich Creek, Austin, TX 78757 512-414-4721 

Reilly Elementary 405 Denson Drive, Austin, TX 78752 512-414-4120 

Ridgetop Elementary 5005 Caswell Ave., Austin, TX 78751 512-414-2000 

Rodriguez Elementary 4400 Franklin Park Drive, Austin, TX 78744 512-841-7272 

Sanchez Elementary 73 San Marcos, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3040 

Sims Elementary 1203 Springdale Road, Austin, TX 78721 512-414-3170 

St. Elmo Elementary 600 W. Street Elmo Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5260 

Summitt Elementary 12207 Brigadoon Lane, Austin, TX 78727 512-414-4245 

Sunset Valley Elementary 3000 Jones Road, Austin, TX 78745 512-414-5100 

Travis Heights Elementary 2010 Alameda Drive, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3480 

Uphaus Early Childhood Center 5200 Freidrich Lane, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-5521 

Walnut Creek Elementary 4010 W. Braker Lane, Austin, TX 78753 512-414-3930 

Webb Primary Center 601 E. Street Johns, Austin, TX 78752 512-414-4170 

Widen Elementary 5606 Nuckols Crossing, Austin, TX 78744 512-414-3607 

Williams Elementary 500 Mairo, Austin, TX 78748 512-414-5245 

Winn Elementary 3500 Susquehanna Lane, Austin, TX 78723 512-414-3950 

Wooldridge Elementary 1412 Norseman Ter., Austin, TX 78758 512-414-4040 

Wooten Elementary 1406 Dale, Austin, TX 78757 512-414-4100 

Zavala Elementary 310 Robert Martinez Jr., Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3025 

Zilker Elementary 1900 Blue Bonnett Lane, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3320 

Special Campuses Address Phone No. 

Elementary Disciplinary Alternative Education 

Program (DAEP) 

906 West Milton Street, Austin, TX 78704 

512-414-2074 

ALC - Alternative Learning Center 901 Neal, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-3610 

Leadership Academy 2515 S. Congress, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3610 

Phoenix Academy 400 W. Live Oak, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3610 

Travis County Day School 8011 B Cameron Rd, Austin, TX 78754 512-414-3610 

Travis County Juvenile 2515 S. Congress, Austin, TX 78704 512-414-3610 

Dentention Center 

Austin State Hospital 5110 Guadalupe, Austin, TX 78751 512-414-4061 

Garza Independence High School 1600 Chicon, Austin, TX 78702 512-414-8616 

Rosedale School 2117 West 49th Street, Austin, TX 78756 512-414-3617 


September 

2012 79

Austin ISD Calendar for FY2013 


September 

2012 80

Organizational Structure 

AISD is an independent, public educational agency operating under the applicable laws and regulations in 

the State of Texas. The district’s organizational hierarchy begins with the students, parents and 

community members who elect a nine-member Board of Trustees to autonomously govern the district. 

The Board of Trustees employs the superintendent, who is the Chief Executive Officer, to manage the 

day-to-day operations of the district. Under the superintendent are seven chiefs, who oversee various 

areas of the district’s operations, including academics, campus operations, human resources, facilities 

and system management, finance, performance evaluation and accountability. The Texas Education 

Agency provides the district’s education accreditation. 



Austin ISD Board of Trustees 

(from left) Robert Schneider, District 7; Tamala Barksdale, At Large 9; Lori Moya, SECRETARY, District 6; 

Cheryl Bradley, District 1; Mark Williams, PRESIDENT, District 5; Vincent M. Torres, VICE PRESIDENT, District 4; 

Christine Brister, District 3; Annette LoVoi, At Large 8; Sam Guzmán, District 2. 


September 

2012 81

AISD Organizational Chart 



September 

2012 82


September 2012 83

Fund Structure Diagram 

All Funds 

Governmental Fund Types 

Propriety Fund Types 



Agency Funds 

General Fund Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Fund Capital Projects Fund 

OFFICIALLY ADOPTED FUNDS (See Note 1) 


General Fund Food Service Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Fund 

Note 1: The audited financial statements of the School District include all funds as shown in the “All Funds” 

structure Diagram above. However, the Texas Education Agency requires only the adoption of the General Fund, 

Food Service Special Revenue Funds, and Debt Service Fund in August. 


September 

2012 84

Financial Structure and Basis for Accounting 

Governmental financial operations are regulated by various kinds of legal provisions. Other types of 

financial matters often are also regulated by charters, ordinances, resolutions, governing body orders, 

and intergovernmental grant or contract regulations. 

The annual operating budget is one of the most important of all legal documents governing financial 

transactions. Upon Board of Trustee approval, the expenditure requests in the budget become binding 

appropriations that may not legally be exceeded by the school district without an amendment. Taxes and 

other revenue sources that finance budgeted expenditures usually require Board enactment. 

An important function of governmental accounting systems is to enable administrators to assure and 

report on compliance with finance-related legal provisions. This assurance and reporting means that the 

accounting system, its terminology, fund structure and procedures must be adapted to satisfy finance 

related legal requirements. However, the basic financial statements of school districts should be prepared 

in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) established by the Governmental 

Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 

Summary Statement of Principles of Accounting and Reporting 

` 

 

 

 

 

Accounting and Reporting Capabilities – The Austin ISD accounting system is maintained in 

accordance with GAAP. All funds and activities are presented fairly and are fully disclosed. The 

district maintains its accounting system in compliance with legal and contractual provisions. 

Fund Accounting System – The Austin ISD accounting system is organized and operated on a 

fund basis. A fund is defined as a fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of 

accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and 

residual equities or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of 

carrying on specific activities or attaining certain objectives in accordance with special 

regulations, restrictions or limitations. Fund financial statements are used to report detailed 

information about the primary government. 

Number of Funds – Austin ISD maintains the number of funds necessary to carry on its functions 

required by law and contract. Funds comply with the properly defined code structures as 

established by the Texas Education Agency 

Types of Funds – The following types of funds are used by state and local governments, including 

Austin ISD: 

o 


• General Fund – to account for all financial resources except those required to be 

accounted for in another fund. 

• Special Revenue Funds – to account for proceeds of specific revenue sources 

(other than trust for individuals, private organizations, or other governments or for 

major capital projects) that are legally restricted to expenditures for specific 

purposes. The Food Services Fund is classified as a Special Revenue Fund. 


September 

2012 85

• Debt Service Funds – to account for the accumulation of resources for, and the 

payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. Debt Service Funds 

are required if they are legally mandated and/or if financial resources are being 

accumulated for principal and interest payments maturing in future years. 

• Capital Projects Funds – to account for financial resources to be used for 

acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by 

Proprietary Funds or in Trust Funds for individuals, private organizations, or other 

governments). Capital outlay financed from general obligation bond proceeds 

should be accounted for through a Capital Projects Fund. 

o 

Proprietary Funds 

• Enterprise Funds – to report any activity for which a fee is charged to external 

users for goods or services. Activities are required to be reported as Enterprise 

Funds if any one of the following criteria is met. 

a.) 

b.) 

c.) 

The activity is financed with debt that is secured solely by a pledge of 

the net revenues from fees and charges of the activity. Debt that is 

secured by a pledge of net revenues from fees and charges and the 

full faith and credit of a related primary government or component unit 

– even if that government is not expected to make any payments – is 

not payable solely from fees and charges of the activity. 

Laws or regulations require that the activity’s costs of providing 

services, including capital costs be recovered with fees and charges, 

rather than with taxes or similar revenues. 

The pricing policies of the activity establish fees and charges 

designed to recover its costs, including capital costs (such as 

depreciation or debt service). 

• Internal Service Funds – to report any activity that provides goods or services to 

other funds, departments or agencies of the primary government and its 

component units, or to other governments, on a cost-reimbursement basis. 

Internal Service Funds should be used only if the reporting government is the 

predominant participant in the activity. Otherwise, the activity should be reported 

as an Enterprise Fund. 

o 

Fiduciary Funds - To account for assets held by the district in a trustee capacity or as an 

agent for individuals, private organizations, other governmental units and/or other funds. 

Trust and Agency Funds therefore cannot be used to support the district’s own programs. 

 

Reporting Capital Assets - A clear distinction has been made between general capital assets and 

capital assets of Proprietary and Fiduciary Funds. Capital assets of Proprietary Funds are 

reported in both the government-wide and fund financial statements. Capital assets of Fiduciary 

Funds are reported only in the statement of fiduciary net assets. All other capital assets of the 

governmental unit are general capital assets. They are not reported as assets in Governmental 

Funds but reported in the governmental activities column in the government-wide statement of 

net assets. 


September 

2012 86

Depreciation of Capital Assets – Capital assets are depreciated over their estimated useful life 

unless they are either inexhaustible or are infrastructure assets using the modified approach. 

Inexhaustible assets such as land and land improvements are not depreciated. Depreciation 

expenses are reported in the government-wide statement of activities; the Proprietary Fund 

statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in fund net assets; and the statement of 

changes in fiduciary new assets. 

Buildings and furniture and equipment of the district are depreciated using the straightline 

method over the following estimated useful lives: 

Items 

Years 

Building and site improvements 30 

Furniture and equipment 5-10 

Vehicles 5-7 

Property under capital leases 10 

Buses 8-10 

Computer software and equipment 3-7 

Portable buildings 10 

 

Valuation of Capital Assets – Capital assets are reported at historical cost. The cost of a capital 

asset includes ancillary charges necessary to place the asset into its intended location and 

condition for use. Donated capital assets are recorded at their estimated fair value at the time of 

acquisition plus ancillary changes, if any. 

 

Reporting Long-Term Liabilities – A clear distinction is made between fund long-term liabilities 

and general long-term liabilities. Long-term liabilities directly related to and expected to be paid 

from Proprietary Funds are reported in the Proprietary Fund statement of net assets and in the 

government-wide statement of net assets. Long-term liabilities directly related to and expected to 

be paid from Fiduciary Funds are reported in the statement of fiduciary net assets. All other unmatured 

general long-term liabilities of the governmental entity are not reported in the 

Governmental Funds but reported in the governmental activities column in the government-wide 

statement of net assets. 

 

Accrual Basis in Governmental Accounting – The modified accrual basis of accounting or accrual 

basis of accounting, as appropriate, is utilized in measuring financial position and operating 

results. 

o 

Governmental Fund revenues and expenditures are recognized on the modified accrual 

basis. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they become available 

and measurable. Expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the fund 

liability is incurred, if measurable, except of un-matured interest on general long-term 

debt, which is recognized when due. 


September 

2012 87

o 

o 

o 

Fiduciary Funds are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the 

accrual basis of accounting, except for recognition of certain liabilities of defined benefit 

pension plans and certain post employment healthcare plans. 

Proprietary Fund statements include net assets, revenues, expenses and changes in 

fund net assets and are recognized on the accrual basis. Revenues are recognized in the 

accounting period in which they are earned and become measurable; expenses are 

recognized in the period incurred, if measurable. 

Transfer should be recognized in the accounting period in which the inter-fund receivable 

and payable arise. 

Fiscal Year – The district’s fiscal year begins September 1 and ends August 31. 

 

Common Terminology and Classification - A common terminology and classification is used 

consistently throughout the budget, the accounts and the financial reports of each fund or activity. 

Budgetary Control and Budgetary Reporting – 

o 

o 

o 

An annual budget is adopted by Austin ISD Board of Trustees. 

The accounting system proves the basis for appropriate budgetary control. 

Budgetary comparison schedules are presented as required supplementary information 

for the General Fund and for each major Special Revenue Fund that has a legally 

adopted annual budget. The budgetary comparison schedule presents both (a) the 

original and (b) the final appropriated budgets for the reporting period as well as (c) 

actual inflows, outflows, and balances, stated on the government’s budgetary basis. 

 

Transfer, Revenue, Expenditure, and Expense Account Classification – Transfers are classified 

separately from revenues and expenditures or expenses in the basic financial statements. 

o 

o 

o 

The statement of activities presents the district’s activities at least at the level of detail 

required in the Governmental Fund statement of revenues, expenditures and changes in 

fund balances-at a minimum by function. The district presents business-type activities at 

least by different identifiable activities. 

Governmental Fund revenues are classified by fund and source. Expenditures are 

classified by fund and source. Expenditures are classified by fund, function (or program), 

organization unit, activity, character, and principal classes of objects. 

Proprietary Fund revenues are reported by major sources, and expenses are classified in 

essentially the same manner as those of similar business organizations, functions or 

activities. 


September 

2012 88

o 

o 

Proceeds of general long-term debt issues are classified separately from revenues and 

expenditures in the Governmental Fund financial statements. 

Transfers are classified separately from revenues and expenditures or expenses in the 

basic financial statements. 

 

Annual Financial Reports 

o 

o 

o 

Appropriate interim financial statements and reports of financial position, operating 

results, and other pertinent information are prepared to facilitate management control of 

financial operations, legislative oversight, and, where necessary or desired, for external 

reporting purposes. 

An annual financial report is prepared and published, covering all funds and activities of 

Austin ISD. The report includes an introductory section, the Management’s Discussion 

and Analysis (MD&A), basic financial statements, required supplementary information 

other than MD&A, combining and individual fund statements, schedules, narrative 

explanations, and statistics. 

The minimum requirements for MD&A, basic financial statements, and required 

supplementary information other than MD&A are: 

• Management’s Discussion and Analysis. 

• Basic financial statement, which includes: 

1. Government-wide financial statements 

2. Fund financial statements 

3. Notes to the financial statements 

• Required supplementary information other than MD&A. 

Overall summary of the State mandated principles and policies are: 

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) – The Austin ISD accounting system is kept in 

accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and presents fairly and with full 

disclosure the funds and activities and results of financial operations in such a manner to 

determine and demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions. 

Whenever conflicts exist between legal requirements and Generally Accepted Accounting 

Principles, the financial statements are prepared in conformity with Generally Accepted 

Accounting Principles, and additional schedules and/or narrative explanations are attached as 

necessary to satisfy or report legal compliance responsibilities and accountabilities. 


September 

2012 89

Fund Accounting – The accounting system is organized and operated on a fund basis. All funds 

of Austin ISD are accounted for and included on the end-of-year combined balance sheet. A fund 

is defined as a fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts recording cash 

and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and residual equities or balances, 

and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or 

attaining certain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions or limitations. 

Austin ISD maintains only the minimum number of funds required for efficient operations. 

Central Accounting – Accounting for funds of the Austin ISD are on an organization-wide basis 

covering all funds. Governmental, Proprietary and Fiduciary Fund types are the accounting 

responsibility of the district’s business office. 

Uniform Classifications and Terminology – Austin ISD uses fund codes, mandatory account 

classifications and terminology prescribed in the Account Code section of the Resource Guide 

from the Texas Education Agency. General ledger accounts prescribing a double entry system 

and distribution of related payroll expenses with payroll are uniformly used throughout the 

budgeting, accounting and financial reporting system. 

 

Fund Equity and Other Credits - Fund equity is comprised of investments in capital assets (other 

credit), and contributed capital, net assets, assigned fund balance, unassigned, non-spendable, 

committed and restricted fund balance. 

Budgetary Control/Encumbrance Accounting – The Austin ISD budget, as adopted, is recorded in 

the general ledger. Revenues and expenditures authorized in the budget are controlled in the 

accounting records and reported in the financial statements. Only the General Fund, Debt Service 

Fund and Food Service Fund are included in the adopted school district budget. 

To control budgeted fund commitments, the accounting system employs a method of 

encumbrance accounting. Encumbrances are documented by contracts, purchase orders, or 

other evidence showing binding commitments for goods or services. 

o 

o 

Encumbrances outstanding at year end represent the estimated amount of the 

expenditures ultimately to result if unperformed contracts in process at year end are 

completed. 

Appropriations lapse at year end. Each outstanding encumbrance is evaluated and may 

or may not be carried forward. Only if there is intent and legal authorization to honor 

them, encumbrances outstanding at year end shall be a reservation of fund balance, and 

the subsequent year’s appropriations provide the authority to complete these 

transactions. 

Budgetary Basis of Accounting – The budgetary basis of accounting is consistently applied in 

budgeting, recording and reporting Foundation School Program (FSP) revenues in PEIMS 

information. Under the budgetary basis, earned and material FSP revenues that are collectible 

beyond 60 days are to be treated consistently for budgeting, recording and reporting through 

PEIMS and for tax rollback rate calculation purposes. The modified accrual basis of accounting is 

used for the Governmental Fund types. 


September 

2012 90

Account Alternatives – The accounting system allows certain flexibility in the recognition of 

relatively minor amounts of certain revenues and expenditures. Application of alternatives in 

accounting methods is consistently applied from accounting period to accounting period. 

o 

o 

o 

Monies collected in advance and the property tax levy recorded in the school district’s 

opening budget entries that will ultimately be recognized as revenues are recorded as 

deferred revenues and at the appropriate time are recognized as revenues of the 

accounting period to which they apply. 

Inventory item of materials, supplies, etc., may be considered expenditures/expenses 

either when purchased (purchases method) or when used (consumption method), but 

significant amounts of inventory shall be reported on the balance sheet. 

Expenditures/expenses for insurance and similar services extending over more than one 

accounting period are not allocated between or among accounting periods, but are 

accounted for as expenditures/expenses of the period of acquisition. 


September 

2012 91


Austin ISD adopts a standardized accounting system as required by Texas Education Code, section 

44.007, which meets all requirements prescribed by the State Board of Education and conforms to 

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The code structure includes a twenty-digit account 

code. Although certain codes within the overview are used at local option, the sequence of the codes 

within the structure, and the funds and chart of accounts, are uniformly used by all school districts in 

accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. 

Table 45 


The Code Structure 

Fund Function Object Sub-Object Organization Fiscal Yr Program Intent 

(3 digits) (2 digits) (4 digits) (2 digits) (3 digits) (1 digit) (2 digits) blank 

X X X - X X - X X X X - X X - X X X - X - X X - X XX 

Major 

FUND 

CODE 

(1XX – 

8XX) 

Account 

Groups 

(9XX) 

Detail 

Major 

Detail 

FUNCTION 

CODE 

(11-99) 

Major 

Account 

Classification 

Detail 

OBJECT EXPENSE CODE 

Assets (1XXX) 

Liabilities (2XXX) 

Fund Equity (3XXX) 

Clearing Accounts (4XXX) 

Revenue/Income (5XXX) 

Expenditures/ 

Expenses (6XXX) 

Other Resources/Non- 

Operating Revenues/ 

Residual Equity 

Transfers 

In (7XXX) 

Other Uses/Non- 

Operating 

Revenues/Residual 

Equity Transfers 

Out (8XXX) 

LOCAL 

OPTION 

CODES 1 

and 2 

(XX) 

ORGANIZATION 

CODE 

(XXX) 

FISCAL 

YEAR 

CODE 

(0-9) 

PROGRAM 

INTENT CODE 

(11-99) 

Indicates a mandatory code 

for State reporting 

purposes. 

Indicates a code that may 

be used at location option. 

LOCAL 

OPTION 

CODES 

3; 4 & 5 

(X; XX) 


September 

2012 92

Fund 

Codes 

O=Optional 

R=Required 


Fund Codes 

Description 

Fund 

Codes 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

Description 

General Funds 

Special Revenue Funds (Cont.) 

161 O Athletics 286 R Title I-SIP Academy Grant-ARRA (Stimulus) 

162 O Medicaid 287 O Southeast Austin Youth Development 

195 O Contractual Obligations 288 O Solar for Schools-ARRA 

199 R General Fund 289 R TX Title I Priority-ARRA 

28A O Texas Regional Collaboratives 

Special Revenue Funds 28B O Capital Area Tech-Prep 

202 R Title VII Emergency Immigrant 28C O Elem School Counseling Program 

203 R Child Care Dev Block Grant 28D O Title I Part-D - ARRA (Stimulus) 

204 R Title IV- Safe & Drug Free 28E O TX Literacy Initiative 

206 R Title III-B Homeless children 28F O Homeless Education Disaster Assistance 

208 R SHAC Grant 28G O Title I SIP Regular - ARRA 

211 R Title I- Part A-Improving Basic Program 28H O Center for Disease Control & Prevention 

212 R Title I- Part C Migrant 28J O School Leadership Program 

215 O Title I- Part D 28K O Smaller Learning Communities 

216 O Title I- Part A-Add'l Assistance for School Improvement 

28L O Teen Parent Child Care 

220 O English Literacy Civics 28M O Title VI-A, Community Service 

222 R Learn & Serve America 28N O Teacher Incentive Grant (TIF) 

224 R IDEA-B Formula 28P O Adv Placement Fee Payment Incent 

225 R IDEA-B Preschool 28Q O Federal Health and Human Services Commission 

226 R IDEA-B Discretionary 28R O Title VI-A, Summer School LEP 

227 R IDEA-B Deaf 28S O Travis Co School Safety Consort 

228 R IDEA-B Preschool Deaf 28T O Emerg Response Sch Safety 

240 R National School Breakfast & Lunch Program 28U O Title I, Part A-Improving Basic Programs-ARRA 

242 R Summer Feeding Program 28V O Title V-Refugee and Entrant Assistance 

243 R Career and Technical- Technical Preparation 28W O Title IV-Hurricane Recovery 

244 R Career and Technical- Basic Grant 28X O Title X, Part C - Education for Homeless 

245 R Career and Technical- Single Parent O Children Act-ARRA 

253 R IDEA-C Early Intervention-Deaf 28Y O Early Learning Opportunities Act 

255 R T II-A Train/Recruiting 28Z O IDEA-B, Preschool-ARRA (Stimulus) 

256 R Comp School Reform Demo Prog 311 R SSA-Learn & Serve America 

259 R 30% Library Matching Funds-Fed 315 R SSA-IDEA-B-Discretionary 

261 R Reading First 316 R SSA-IDEA-B-Deaf 

262 R Enhancing Education Through Technology 317 R SSA-IDEA-B-Preschool-Deaf 

263 R Title III, Part A, English Language Acquisition & 340 R SSA-IDEA-C-Early Intervention Deaf 

Language Enhancement 349 R TARGET Grant 

264 R Title IV Community Service Learning 367 R Trav Co Sch Safe-Fiscal Agent 

265 R 21st Century Community Learning 368 O Emerg Resp Schl Safety 

266 R ARRA of 2009, Title XIV, State Fiscal Stab Fund 383 R Prof Staff Develop 

279 R Title II, Part D, Sub 1 -Enhancing Education Through 384 R Texas After School Initiative 

Technology-ARRA (Stimulus) 385 R Visually Impaired 

280 R Texas Homeless Education American Recovery 386 R Regional Day School for the Deaf 

283 R IDEA-B-Formula-ARRA (Stimulus) 390 R Early Childhood Limited English Proficient 

284 O Safe School/Healthy Students Grant- Summer Program 

285 O American Indian Education Project 392 R Non-Education Community- Based Support 

286 R Title I-SIP Academy Grant-ARRA (Stimulus) 393 R Texas Successful Schools Program 

287 O Southeast Austin Youth Development 394 R Student Parent Grant 

288 O Solar for Schools-ARRA 395 Comprehensive Dev Guide 

279 R Title II, Part D, Sub 1 -Enhancing Education Through 397 R Advanced Placement Incentives 

Technology-ARRA (Stimulus) 399 R Investment Capital Grant 

280 R Texas Homeless Education American Recovery 401 R Optional Extended Year 

283 R IDEA-B-Formula-ARRA (Stimulus) 404 R Accelerated Reading Instruction 

284 O IDEA-B-Preschool-ARRA (Stimulus) 40A O Algebra Readiness 

285 O American Indian Education Project 40B O College Readiness-MS Students 

409 R High School Completion & Success Grant 


September 

2012 93

Fund Codes (continued) 

O=Optional 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

R=Required 

Fund 

Fund 

Description 

Codes 

Codes 

Description 



42S O Texas State University 49R O Annenberg Foundation 

42T O Emergency Response Fund 49S O Applied Materials Foundation 

42U O Texas School Ready Grant 49T O Texas High School Project (Gates) 

42V O TEA-Limited English Proficient Student Success 49U O Lowe's Charitable and Educational Foundation 

435 R Regional Day School for the Deaf 49V O A Glimmer of Hope Austin Foundation 

461 R Principal and Administrative Activity 49W O ST David's Foundation 

479 R Permanent Fund 49X O State Technology Advancement Collaborative 

481 O ACC Adult Basic Education 49Y O National Education Association 

482 O Social Emotional Learning 410 R State Textbook Fund 

483 O Motorola 411 R Technology Allotment 

484 O Dell Foundation 413 R Telecomm Infrastructure Fd 

485 O RGK Foundation 414 R Texas Reading, Math and Science Initiative 

486 O Intel Teach 415 R Pre-K Grant 

488 O Target Grant 417 R Education Technology Pilot 

489 O Advanced Micro Devices 418 R Suppl Compensation-HB 3343 

48A O TX Regional Collaboratives 419 R TDPRS-Parent as Teachers 

48B O Synopsys Community Fund 421 R Master Reading Teacher 

48C O Lowe's 422 R AP/IB Incentive Equip & Materials 

48D O Education of Young Women 424 R Future Problem Solvers 

48E O Tides Foundation 425 O TWC Apprenticeship 

48F O Austin Library Foundation 426 R Sustainability 

48G O S.M.E. Education Foundation 427 O TX After School Init - Middle School 

48H O Health Industry Steering Committee (HISC) 428 R High School Allotment HB1 

48J O Asia Society 429 O Read to Succeed 

48K O Capital Fund For Education 42A O Master Reading Teacher 

48L O IBM Grant 42B O Jr Master Garener 

48M O The Laura Bush Foundation for Libraries 42C O Rider 67, Library Match 

48N O Babcock & Brown 42D O Intl Baccalaureate Midl Yr Pro 

48P O Dollar General 42E O TX Parks & Wildlife-Outdoor Ed 

48Q O National Wildlife Federation 42F O Texas Bar Foundation 

48R O Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG) 42G O Teacher Supply Reimbursement 

48T O Dairy Max-Fuel Up Play 42H O Texas Dept of Agriculture 

492 O KDK-Harman Foundation 42I O UT support for 7th Graders 

493 O Colony Park Improvements 42J O Texas Tobacco Grant 

494 O Community Education - City 42K O Texas Health & Human Services Commission 

495 O Community Development - Block -City 42L O Texas Educator Excellence Award Program 

496 O Met Life-New Teacher Center 42M O Texas Dept of Transportation 

497 O Sooch Fund/Pietruszynski 42N O Texas Fitness Now Grant 

498 O Moody Foundation 42P O HB1-Begin Teacher Induction & Mentoring 

499 O Washington Mutual 42Q O District Awards for Teacher Excellence 

49C O Intel Foundation 42R O Governors Educator Excellence Awards Prog 

49D 

O Raise Up Texas Grant 

49E O FIRST in TX-TWC Debt Service Fund 

49F O H-E-B Excellence in Teaching 511 O Debt Service Fund 

49G 

O Austin Energy 

49H O Community Education -County Capital Project Funds 

49J O 3M Ingenuity Grant 628 O 1996 Issue: Bond Sale No. 1 

49K O Powell Foundation 629 O Capital Projects '97 

49L O Advanced Placement Strategies 630 O Capital Projects '98 

49M O Meadows Foundation 631 O Erate Reimbursements 

49N O STEPS to a Healthier Community 633 O 2002-A G.O.Bond 

49P O NCCEP/SBC Gear Up Supplement 634 O 2002 Q.Z.A. Bond 

49Q O Austin Partners in Education 635 O 2004-A G.O. Bond 


September 

2012 94

Fund Codes (continued) 

O=Optional 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

R=Required 

Fund 

Fund 

Description 

Codes 

Codes 

Description 

Capital Project Funds (Cont.) 


635 O 2004-A G.O. Bond 805 O Barbara Jordan Memorial 

636 O 2002-B G.O. Bond 806 O Expendable Trust Fund 

637 O Commercial Paper 826 O Youth Orchestra 

638 O 2005-A G.O. Bond 

639 O 2005-B Q.Z.A. Bond Trust Funds-Non Expendable 

640 O 2006 Q.Z.A. Bond 836 O Non Expendable Trust 

641 O 2008 Q.Z.A. Bond 

642 O Commercial Paper-2008 Bond Program Agency Funds 

648 O 2004-Sch Bldg & Refunding Bonds 865 R Student Activity Account 

649 O 2008-Sch Bldg & Refunding Bonds 876 O GAATN 

Enterprise Funds 

General Fixed Asset Account Group 

717 O Child Care Program 901 R General Capital Assets 

902 R Long Term Debt 


752 R Print Shop and Reproduction 

753 R Workers Comp Self Insurance 

75A O Health Self-Insurance Fund 

771 O Campus Police 

772 O Laundry Service-Clifton 


September 

2012 95

11 Instruction 

Function Codes 

23 School Leadership 

This function is used for activities that 

deal directly with the interaction between 

teachers and students in a school 

classroom, in other locations such as a 

home or hospital, and in other learning 

situations. It may also be provided 

through some other approved medium 

such as television, radio, telephone, 

telecommunications, multimedia and 

correspondence. This function includes 

expenditures/expenses for direct 

classroom instruction and other activities 

that deliver enhance or direct the delivery 

of learning situations to students. 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 

This function is used for expenditures / 

expenses that are directly and exclusively 

used for resource centers, establishing 

and maintaining libraries and other major 

facilities dealing with education resources 

and media. 

13 Curriculum Development and Instructional 

Staff Development 



used to aid instructional staff in planning, 

developing and evaluating the process of 

providing learning experiences for 

students. Expenditures and expenses 

include in-service training and other staff 

development for instructional or 

instructional-related personnel. This 

function also includes expenditures and 

expenses related to research and 

development of new or modified 

instructional methods, techniques, 

procedures, services, etc. 

21 Instructional Leadership 

This function is used for expenditures or 

expenses that are directly used for 

managing, directing, supervising and 

providing leadership for staff who provide 

general and special instructional services. 

31 

32 

This function is used for expenditures and/or 

expenses that are used to direct and manage 

a school campus. They include the activities 

performed by the principal, assistant 

principals, and other assistants while they – 

Supervise all operations of the 

campus. 

Evaluate staff members of the 

campus. 

 

 

Assign duties to staff members 

Maintain the records of students on 

the campus 

Guidance, Counseling & Evaluation Services 



used for assessing and testing students’ 

abilities, aptitudes and interests; counseling 

students with respect to career and 

educational opportunities and helping them 

establish realistic goals. This function 

includes cost of psychological services, 

identification of individual characteristics, 

testing, educational counseling, student 

evaluation and occupational counseling. 

Social Work Services 



used for activities such as: 

 

 

 

Investigating and diagnosing student 

social needs arising out of the home, 

school or community. 

Casework and group work services 

for the child, parent or both. 

Interpreting the social needs of 

students for other staff members. 

Promoting modifications of the 

circumstances surrounding the 

individual students which are related 

to his or her social needs. (This 

includes referrals to and interaction 

with other governmental agencies). 


September 

2012 96

33 


Function Codes (continued) 

36 Extracurricular Activities (continued) 

34 

This function is used for 

expenditures/expenses that are directly 

and exclusively used for providing 

physical health service to students. This 

includes activities that provide students 

with appropriate medical, dental and 

nursing services. 

Student Transportation 


expenses that are incurred for 

transporting students to and from school. 

Expenditures / expenses for regular bus 

routes to and from school are to be 

recorded using program intent code 99 

(undistributed) or organization code 998 

(unallocated, local option). 

Expenditures/expenses for transportation 

specially and exclusively for purposes of 

transporting students relating to 

enhanced program intents such as 

Career and Technical and Services to 

Students with Disabilities (Special 

Education), etc., are to be recorded in 

function 34 with the appropriate program 

intent codes. 

41 

51 

improvement of skills in either a competitive 

or noncompetitive setting. Extracurricular 

activities include athletics and other activities 

that normally involve competition between 

schools (and frequently involve offsetting 

gate receipts or fees such as football, 

baseball, volleyball, track and tennis). Other 

kinds of related activities are included (such 

as drill teams, pep squad and cheerleading, 

University Interscholastic League competition 

such as one-act plays, speech, debate, 

band, Future Farmers of America (FFA), 

National Honor Society, etc.). 


This function is for expenditures / expenses 

that are for purposes of managing or 

governing the school district as an overall 

entity. This function covers multiple activities 

that are not directly and exclusively used for 

cost applicable to specific functions. General 

Administration is an indirect cost applicable 

to other expenditure functions of a School 

District. 

Facilities Maintenance and Operations 

35 

Food Services 

This function is used for food service 

operation expenditures/expenses, 

including the cost of food, labor, and 

other expenditures / expenses necessary 

for the preparation, transportation and 

storage of food to provide to students 

and staff. Expenditures / expenses are 

used directly and exclusively for 

supervision and maintenance of a food 

service operation. 

52 


expenses for activities to keep the facilities 

and grounds open, clean, comfortable and in 

effective working condition and state of 

repair, and insured. This function is used to 

record expenditures/expenses for the 

maintenance and operations of the physical 

facilities and grounds. This function also 

includes expenditures / expenses associated 

with warehousing and receiving services. 

Security and Monitoring Services 

36 

Extracurricular Activities 


expenses for school-sponsored activities 

outside of the school day. These 

activities are generally designed to 

provide students with experiences such 

as motivation and the enjoyment and 

This function is used for expenditures and 

expenses that are for activities to keep 

student and staff surroundings safe, whether 

in transit to or from school, on a campus or 

participating in school-sponsored events at 

another location. 


September 

2012 97

53 

61 


Function Codes (continued) 

81 

This function is for expenditures and 

expenses for data processing services, 

whether in-house or contracted. Examples 

of function 53 costs are costs for computer 

facility management; computer processing; 

system development; analysis of 

workflows, processes and requirements; 

coding, testing, debugging and 

documentation; system integration; design 

of applications; maintenance of programs 

and networks; and those interfacing costs 

associated with general types of technical 

assistance to data users. Specific types of 

applications include student account, 

financial account, and human 

resources/personnel. Personal computers 

that are stand alone are to be charged to 

the appropriate function. Peripherals 

including terminal and printers are to be 

charged to the appropriate minicomputers, 

servers, and networked or stand alone 

microcomputers that provide services to 

multiple functions are to be recorded here. 


This function is used for expenditures that 

are for activities or purposes other than 

regular public education and adult basic 

education services. These types of 

expenditures are used for services or 

activities relating to the whole community. 

This includes providing resources to nonpublic 

schools, institutions of higher 

education, and any proprietary types of 

services incurred for outside entities in the 

community. 

91 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction, 

con’t. 

equipping, and/or making additions to 

real property and sites, including lease 

and capital lease transactions. 

Contracted Instructional Services 

Between Public Schools 

This function code is used for the 

following types of expenditures: 

 

 

Providing financial resources 

for services in another public 

school through a contract for 

education of nonresident 

students under Subchapter E, 

Chapter 41, TEC. 

Purchasing attendance credits 

from the State under 

subchapter D, Chapter 41, 

TEC. 

93 Payments to Fiscal Agent/Member 

Districts of Shared Service 

Arrangements 

This function code is used for the 

following types of expenditures: 

Payments from a member 

district to a fiscal agent of a 

shared service arrangement; or, 

 

Payments from a fiscal agent to 

a member district of a shared 

service arrangement. 

71 

81 

Debt Service 

This function is used for expenditures that 

are for the payment of debt principals and 

interests. 


This function is used by School Districts for 

expenditures that are for acquiring, 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 

This function is used to report 

administrative functions not required to 

be reported in Function 41- General 

Administration. The fees for property 

appraisal and tax collection are paid 

from this function. 


September 

2012 98

Local 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

Object Description 

Revenue Object Codes 

5711 R Taxes- Current Year Levy 

5712 R Taxes- Prior Years 

5719 R Penalty & Interest- Other Tax Revenues 

5739 R Tuition & Fees from Local Services 

5742 R Earnings from Temporary Deposits and Investments 

5743 R Rent Revenues 

5744 R Foundations, Gifts and Bequests 

5745 R Insurance Recovery 

5748 O Revenue from City, County, Higher Education 

Food Service Fund- Prepaid Meals 

5749 R Other Revenues from Local Sources 

5751 R Food Service Activity 

5752 R Athletic Activities 

5754 R Interfund Service Provided and Used Interfund Transactions 

5755 R Enterprising Services Revenue 

5769 R Misc Rev from Intermediate Srcs 

State 


5811 R Per Capita Apportionment 

5812 R Foundation School Program 

5816 O State Indirect Costs 

5817 O PY State Rev Adjustments 

5819 R Other Foundation School Program Act Revenues 

5829 R State Program Revenue distributed by Texas Education Agency 

5831 R TRS on Behalf Payment 

5839 R State of Texas Government Agencies other than TEA 

Federal 


5916 O Federal Indirect Costs 

5919 R Federal Revenues Distributed Through Government Entities 

Other than State or Federal Agencies 

5921 R School Breakfast Program 

5922 R National School Lunch Program 

5923 R USDA Donated Commodities 

5927 O After School Snack Program 

5929 R Federal Revenue Distributed by the Texas Education Agency 

5931 R School Health & Related Services (SHARS) 

5932 R Medicaid Administrative Claiming Program (MAC) 

5939 R Federal Revenues Distributed by State of Texas Gov. Agencies 

other than Texas Education Agency 

5946 O Building America Bond Subsidy 

5949 R Federal Revenues Distributed Directly From Fed. 

5952 R Shared Service Arrangement-Federal Revenues from Fiscal Agent 


September 

2012 99

Expenditure Object Codes 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

6100 Payroll Costs 

6112 R Substitute Teachers 

6116 O Substitute for Other Professionals 

6117 O Career Ladder 

6118 O Extra Duty/Signing Bonus Pay 

6119 R Professional Salaries 

6121 R Extra Duty/Overtime 

6122 R Subs for Support Personnel 

6125 O Part-Time Hourly 

6129 R Salaries for Support Personnel 

6139 R Employee Allowance 

6141 R Social Security/Medicare 

6142 R Group Health & Life Insurance 

6143 R Wk's Comp 

6144 R TRS On Behalf Payments 

6145 R Unemp Comp 

6146 R Teacher Retirement 

6148 O Salary Adjustments 

6149 R Other Employee Benefits 

6200 Professional & Contracted Services 

6211 R Legal Services 

6212 R Audit Services 

6213 R Tax Appraisal & Collection 

6219 R Professional Services 

6221 R Staff Tuition & Fees-Higher Education 

6222 R Student Tuition-Public Schools 

6223 R Student Tuition-Other than Public School 

6224 R Student Attendance Credits 

6229 R Other Tuition & Transfer Payments 

6239 R Education Service Center Services 

6244 O Maint: Furniture & Equipment 

6245 O Maint: Vehicles 

6246 O Maint: Bldg & Grounds 

6247 O Design Fees 

6249 R Equipment Maintenance Repairs 

6255 O Water, Wastewater, Sanitation 

6256 O Telephone, Telecom, Cell Phone 

6257 O Electricity 

6258 O Gas & Other Fuels 

6259 R Other Utilities 


September 

2012 100

Expenditure Object Codes (continued) 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

6200 Professional & Contracted Services (Cont.) 

6291 R Consulting Services 

6294 O Cont Srvs-Portable Bldg 

6295 O Contract-Metro/Harris Transp 

6298 O Miscellaneous Contracted Srvcs 

6299 R Reproduction Services 

6300 Supplies & Materials 

6311 R Gasoline & Other Fuels 

6319 R Custodial/Maint Supplies 

6321 R Textbooks 

6329 R Reading Materials including Library Books 

6339 R Testing Materials 

6341 R Food 

6342 R Non Food 

6344 R USDA Donated Commodities 

6349 R Other Food Service Supplies 

6396 O Computer Related Equipment >$300 &

Expenditure Object Codes (continued) 

O=Optional 

R=Required 

6500 Debt Service 

6511 R Bond Principal 

6512 R Capital Lease Principal 

6513 R Long Term Debt Principal 

6521 R Interest on Bonds 

6523 R Interest on Debt 

6599 R Other Debt Service Fees 

6600 Capital Outlay 

6619 R Land Purchase 

6624 O Engineering Fees 

6625 O Building Improvements 

6626 O Geotech Testing 

6627 O City and County Fees 

6629 R Other Costs To Bldg Purchase 

6631 R Vehicles 

6639 R Equipment > $5000 Per Unit 


September 

2012 102

Table 46 


Function/Program Intent Code Matrix 

199.12.6119.00.002.1.99.0.00 

Program Intent Codes 

Function 

Codes 

11 

Instructional 

Related 

Service 

12 

Instructional 

Resources & 

Media 

Services 

13 

Instructional 

Staff 

Development 

21 

Instructional 

Leadership 

11 

Instruction 

21 

Gifted & 

Talented 

22 

Career & 

Technology 

23 

Special 

Education 

24 

Accelerated 

Learning 

25 

ESL 

Bilingual 

30 

State 

Comp 

Ed 

31 

High 

School 

Allotment 

32 

Pre-K 

99 

Generic 

23 

School 

Leadership 

31 

Guidance 

Counseling & 

Evaluation 

32 

Social Work 

Services 

33 

Health 

Services 

34 


35 

Student 

Nutrition 

36 

Co-Curricular 

Extracurricular 

Activities 

41-99 

All Others 


September 

2012 103

Significant Financial Policies & Procedures 

Measurement Focus – The government-wide financial statements are reported using the flow of 

economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting, as are the Proprietary Fund 

type financial statements. All Governmental Funds are accounted for “spending” or “financial flow” 

measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. This means that only current assets 

and current liabilities are generally included on their balance sheets. The reported fund balance of 

Governmental Funds is considered a measure of “available spendable resources”. The Fiduciary Fund 

financial statement does not have a measurement focus. 

Cash Management – Developing an effective cash management program can provide the district with 

additional revenues to fund essential programs and operations. Maximizing the return on invested funds, 

while ensuring the safety and liquidity of investments, has become a high priority for the district. Effective 

cash management programs: 

 

 

 

Provide high rates of return through the use of various investment instruments. 

Are based on a comprehensive written investment policy approved by the Board. 

Allow personnel to become skilled in investment procedures and techniques and stay abreast of 

current money markets. 

The Board of Trustees adopted an investment policy (CDA-Legal) regarding investment of funds as 

defined by the Public Fund Investment Act. This policy authorizes the district to invest any and all of its 

funds in fully collateralized certificates of deposit, direct debt securities of the United States of America or 

the State of Texas, other obligations the principal and interest on which are unconditionally guaranteed by 

the State of Texas or the United States, fully collateralized direct repurchase agreements, bankers’ 

acceptances, local government investment pools, money market mutual funds, and other investments 

specifically allowed by Chapter 2256 of the Texas Government Code (the Public Funds Investment Act) 

and Sections 23.80 and 20.42 of the Texas Education Code. The district accrues interest on temporary 

investments based on the terms and effective interest rates of the specific investments. The district’s 

policy is to report all highly liquid debt instruments, such as local government investment pools, treasury 

and agency obligations, with a remaining maturity of one year or less at the time of purchase, at 

amortized cost and all other investments at fair value. 

Debt Management – For the past decade and in the foreseeable future, the district has and will continue 

to experience bond elections authorizing new bonds and a continual issuance of bonds. The district 

receives a credit enhanced bond rating of AAA for its bonds that are guaranteed by the State of Texas 

Permanent School Fund (PSF). The district’s underlying ratings are: Moody’s (Aaa), Standard & Poor's 

(AA+), and Fitch (‘AA’). A financial advisor is employed to assist the district in managing its debt. 

As of August 31, 2012, it is projected the district will have $749,569,757 in outstanding general obligation 

bonds. The outstanding debt represents approximately 1.21 percent of the district’s net taxable value 

(before freeze). 

Currently the district has two bond programs, 2004 and 2008. The 2004 bond program is almost at the 

end stage and the 2008 bond program has started in 2008 to address overcrowding and provide funds to 

build a district-wide performing arts center. 


September 

2012 104

Voter 

Approved 

Table 47 


Current Bond Authorization Status 

Recap of Bond 

Authorization 

Bonds Issued To 

Date 

Authorized / 

Unissued Bonds 

2004 $ 519,526,616 $ 466,770,137 $ 52,756,479 

2008 $ 343,717,819 $ 167,166,109 $ 176,551,710 * 

*As of 07/26/2012, the district has $43,285,000 in outstanding commercial paper. 

In order to minimize the tax impact, negative arbitrage, and reduce overall borrowing costs associated 

with the financing of projects authorized by its bond elections, the district established a commercial paper 

programs in July 2005. While numerous other Texas government entities have established commercial 

paper programs over the years, this program was new for school districts in Texas. The district utilizes its 

commercial paper programs to reduce its ongoing costs of capital projects and to provide interim 

financing during the construction periods for projects. When the district nears its commercial paper 

capacity it issues refunding bonds to refund a long-term basis the interim financing provided by the 

commercial paper. Commercial paper is a short-term note with maturities ranging from 1 day to 270 days. 

Objectives of Budgeting - A budget is considered balanced when the revenues and other resources that 

are generated to finance the budget equal its estimated expenditures and other uses. 

Performance evaluation allows citizens and taxpayers to hold policy makers and administrators 

accountable for their actions. Because accountability to citizens often is stated explicitly in State laws and 

constitutions, it is considered a cornerstone of budgeting and financial reporting. The Governmental 

Accounting Standard Board (GASB) recognizes its importance with these objectives in its GASB 

Concepts Statement No. 1: 

 

 

 

Financial reporting should provide information to determine whether current-year revenues were 

sufficient to pay for current-year services. 

Financial reporting should demonstrate whether resources were obtained and used in 

accordance with the entity’s legally adopted budget. It should also demonstrate compliance with 

other finance-related legal or contractual requirements. 

Financial reporting should provide information to assist users in assessing the service efforts, 

costs and accomplishments of the governmental entity. 

Meeting these objectives requires budget preparation to include several concepts recognizing 

accountability. Often these concepts have been mandated for State and local public sector budgets. They 

include requirements that budgets should: 

 

 

 

Be balanced so that current revenues are sufficient to pay for current services. 

Be prepared in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local legal mandates and 

requirements. 

Provide a basis for the evaluation of a government’s service efforts, costs and accomplishments. 

Although the objective of balanced budgets is generally applicable to the district to ensure long-term fiscal 

health, the Board of Trustees allows variations of this objective over short-term periods from time to time. 


September 

2012 105

For example, the balanced budget objective may be met through the use of fund balance reserves to pay 

for current services during certain school years. Such uses of fund balance reserves must be in 

accordance with applicable state and local fund balance policies. 

Fund Balance Reserves 

Reserves have been established in the Governmental Funds financial statements to indicate that a 

portion of the fund balance is not available for appropriation for expenditure, or is legally segregated for a 

specific future use. Designations of fund equity are the representations of management for the utilization 

of financial resources in future periods. 

The Board has established a policy that requires the district to maintain a minimum of 14 percent of 

operating expenditures in its General Fund balance. 

Fund balance is the net difference between the assets and liabilities of a fund. In much the same way as 

a homeowner maintains a savings account for unexpected emergencies, having a healthy fund balance 

enables the district to cover operating costs during low cash periods. Further, the district saves millions of 

dollars as a result of securing lower interest rates through strong bond ratings. Ensuring an adequate 

reserve level is essential to maintaining high bond ratings and supporting unplanned needs and 

emergencies. The following table provides a ten year history of the district’s reserve levels. AISD will 

continue to maintain a prudent reserve of at least 14 percent of expenditures to ensure sound fiscal 

health. 

In FY2012, the district implemented the new requirement from GASB 54 to divide the fund balances into 

five different categories, including non-spendable, restricted, committed, assigned and unassigned. 

 

 

 

General Fund - The district has determined its priority to maintain the General Fund’s fund 

balance at a level not less than 14 percent of the budgeted expenditures of the district General 

Fund. The Texas Education Agency has a rule to compute the optimum unassigned fund balance 

equal to the estimated amount to cover cash flow deficits in the General Fund for the fall period in 

the following fiscal year, plus estimated average monthly cash disbursements of the general Fund 

for the nine months following the fiscal year. An appropriate fund balance level is one of the 

measurements for the School First (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas) program required 

for all school districts in the State. In FY2013, the district will utilize $28 million from the fund 

balance to cover the deficit of the General Fund budget. 

Food Service – The district maintains a sufficient fund balance to cover three months of average 

expenditures for the Food Service operations. In the FY2013 school year, the district will utilize 

$582,456 from the fund balance to cover the deficit of the Food Service budget. 

Debt Service Fund – The district maintains a sufficient fund balance to cover the upcoming 

obligations on the required payment date. In the FY2013 school year, the district will utilize 

$462,627 from the fund balance to cover the deficit of the Debt Service budget. 


September 

2012 106

Millions 

$92 

$81 

$82 

$145 

$152 

$146 

$172 

$219 

$248 

$220 

Table 48 


General Fund - Fund Balance (In Millions) 

300 

250 

200 

150 

$120.6 

$129.9 $121.0 

$148.3 

$179.6 

$199.1 

$184.6 

100 

$66.5 $60.7 $57.9 

50 

0 


Total General Fund Fund Balance 

Unassigned General Fund Fund Balance 

14.0% Requirement Optimal Cash Flow for 2.5 Months 

Risk Management 

The district’s risk management program encompasses various means of protecting the district against 

losses. Various risks of loss include those related to torts, theft, damage, destruction of assets, business 

interruption, errors and omissions, injuries to employees, and disasters. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The district participates in the Texas Association of School Boards Modified Self-Funded program 

for its general liability, professional/legal liability and vehicle liability insurance. 

The district partners with the Texas Association of School Boards for the administration of its selffunded 

Workers’ Compensation insurance. 

The district is self-insured up to $400,000 per occurrence for losses related to workers’ 

compensation and has purchased excess coverage through a commercial insurer licensed in the 

State of Texas. 

The district has commercial insurance for all other risks of loss. 

The district provides employee access to health, group life, disability and dental insurance as well 

as Cafeteria 125 deferred tax benefit options. 

The district is self-insured up to $350,000 per claim for losses incurred in the health insurance 

program and has purchased excess coverage through a commercial insurer licensed in the State 

of Texas. 

Independent Audit & Financial Reporting 

The Texas Education Code requires that school districts are audited annually. The audit is made on an 

organization-wide basis and involves all fund types and account groups of the school district. The audit is 

also designed to meet the requirements of the Federal Single Audit Act of 1984 and the related provisions 

of OMB Circular A-133 “Audits of State, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations.” Upon 

completion, the annual financial report is submitted to the Texas Education Agency for review. The 

financial report is designed to meet specific monitoring needs of the Texas Education Agency. 


September 

2012 107

Budget Policies & Development Procedures 

State Requirements 

Sections 44.002 through 44.006 of the Texas Education Code establish the legal basis for budget 

development in School districts. The following items summarize the legal requirements of the code: 

 

 

 

 

The Superintendent is the budget officer for the district and prepares or causes the budget to be 

prepared. 

The district budget must be prepared by a date set by the State Board of Education, currently 

August 31. In order for the budget to be adopted by the Board of Trustees, the district budget 

must be prepared by August 20. 

The President of the Board of Trustees must call a public meeting of the Board of Trustees, giving 

ten days public notice in a newspaper, for the adoption of the district budget. Any taxpayer in the 

district may be present and participate in the meeting. 

Concurrently with the publication of notice of the budget, the district must post a summary of the 

proposed budget on its website. The summary of the budget is presented in the following function 

areas: 

o Instruction – functions 11, 12, 13 

o Instructional Support- functions 21, 23, 31, 32, 33, 36 

o Central Administration – function 41 

o District Operations – functions 51, 52, 53, 34, 35 

The budget document of the district complied with all the above requirements. 

Legal Requirements 

Legal requirements are formulated by the State, TEA and the local district. Additional requirements from 

TEA include: 

 

 

The budget must be adopted by the Board of Trustees, inclusive of amendments, no later than 

August 31. 

Minutes from the district Board Meetings will be used by TEA to record adoptions of and 

amendments to the budget. 

 

Budgets for the General Fund, the Food Service Fund (whether accounted for in the General 

Fund, Special Revenue Fund, or Enterprise Fund), and the Debt Service Fund must be included 

in the official district budget. These budgets must be prepared and approved, at least at the fund 

and function levels, to comply with the State’s legal level of control mandates. 


September 

2012 108

The officially adopted budget, as amended, must be filed with TEA through Public Education 

Information Management System (PEIMS) by the date prescribed in the annual system 

guidelines. Revenue, other sources, other uses 

and fund balances must be reported by fund, object, fiscal year and amount. Expenditures must 

be reported by fund, function, object, organization, fiscal year, program intent and amount. 

A school district must amend the Adopted Budget before exceeding a functional expenditure 

category, i.e., instruction, administration, etc., in the total district budget. The Annual Financial 

and Compliance Report should reflect the Amended Budget amounts on the schedule comparing 

budgeted and actual amounts. The requirement for filing the amended budget with TEA is 

satisfied when the school district files its Annual Financial and Compliance Report. 


September 

2012 109

District 

Goals 

Goal # 1: 


perform at or 

above grade 

level. 

Goal # 2: 

Achievement 

gaps among all 

student groups 

will be 

eliminated. 

Goal # 3: 


graduate ready 

for college, 

career, and life 

in a globally 

competitive 

economy. 

Goal # 4: 

All schools will 

meet or exceed 

state 

accountability 

standards, and 

the district will 

meet federal 

standards and 

exceed state 

standards. 

Board Goals, Strategies to Achieve Goals, and 


How To 

Achieve The Goals 

1. Provide a high quality, 

well-rounded 

educational experience 

to all students that is 

rigorous, culturally 

relevant, healthful, and 

engaging. 

2. Build strong 

relationships with 

students, families, and 

the community to 

increase trust and 

shared responsibility. 

3. Ensure that every 

classroom has a highquality, 

effective 

educator, supported by 

high-quality, effective 

administrators and 


4. Align resources to 

accomplish priorities 

within a balanced 

budget. 


1. The Board seeks to maintain an unassigned fund balance 

consistent with district policy in an effort to (1) maintain a bond 

rating of Aaa or higher, (2) a “Superior” financial rating from the 

State and to (3) ensure a sufficient operating reserve to support 

operating costs for at least two months. 

2. The Board recognizes its fiduciary responsibility to adopt a balanced 

budget and will seek to do so by considering all cost savings and 

efficiency options. 

3. If projected expenditures exceed projected revenue and budget 

reductions become necessary, the district will first seek those 

options that are sustainable and will address structural imbalances 

on a multi-year basis. One-time solutions, including the use of fund 

balance reserves will be considered with caution and appropriately 

factored into out-year deficits. 

4. The district will continue to pursue additional revenue, costs savings 

and efficiencies; and will work to reduce investments into 

programming that hasn’t shown sufficient results. 

5. The budget will prioritize investments that are aligned with our 

Strategic Goals as outlined in the Strategic Plan: 

All students will perform at or above grade level. 

Achievement gaps among student groups will be 

eliminated. 

All students will graduate ready for college, career and life 

in a globally competitive economy. 

All schools will meet or exceed state accountability 

standards, and the district will meet federal standards and 

exceed state standards. 

6. We recognize the need to target resource investments into 

programming that supports achievement growth for all schools. 

Therefore any new budgetary investments will reflect the Strategic 

Priorities established by the Board. 

7. The performance results from the District’s Performance 

Management System which includes: the Districtwide Balanced 

Scorecard, Strategic Plan Monitoring tools, program evaluations, 

electronic dashboards, operational Key Performance Indicators 

(KPIs) and individual employee evaluations will be used to make 

budgetary decisions in an effort to establish a budget that is 

performance-driven and based on proven results. 

8. The budget process must be transparent and include sufficient 

opportunity for community engagement and feedback. 

9. The Board seeks to maintain competitive total compensation levels 

for all classes of employees and will consider such 

recommendations as long as they are sustainable. 

10. Budgeted assumptions for staffing ratios must meet State standards 

unless a waiver is sought from the State. 

11. The budget should be developed in a multi-year framework 

(minimum three years) to account for out-year implications of 

budget proposals and revenue estimates. 


September 

2012 110

Strategic Plan Framework 

In December 2009, the Board of Trustees approved the AISD Strategic Plan for FY2010-2015. With 

limited resources, AISD must remain focused on the goals and strategies that will best prepare all 

students for college, career and life in a globally competitive environment. This plan was reviewed and 

revised in January 2012. 

Mission 

WHAT WE DO 


AISD exists to provide a comprehensive 


challenging, and inspires all students to 

make a positive contribution to society. 

Vision 

WHERE WE WANT TO BE 

AISD will be nationally recognized as an 

outstanding school district, instilling a passion 

for life-long learning in all students. 

Values 

WHAT WE BELIEVE IN 


Excellence 

Integrity 

Equity 

Respect 


Goals 

WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH 

 

 

 

 

All students will perform at or above grade 

level. 

Achievement gaps among all student 

groups will be eliminated. 

All students will graduate ready for college, 

career and life in a globally competitive 

economy. 

All schools will meet or exceed state 

accountability standards, and the district 

will meet federal standards and exceed 

state standards. 

Strategies 

HOW WE WILL ACHIEVE OUR GOALS 

 

 

 

 

Provide a high-quality, well-rounded 

educational experience to all students that is 

rigorous, culturally relevant, healthful and 

engaging. 

Build strong relationships with students, 

families, and the community to increase trust 

and shared responsibility. 

Ensure that every classroom has a highquality, 

effective educator, supported by 

high-quality, effective administrators and 


Align resources to accomplish priorities 

within a balanced budget. 

Measurable Outcomes 

HOW WE WILL CHECK 

PROGRESS ON OUR GOALS 

1. Results of standardized testing 

2. Achievement gaps among student groups 

3. Graduation rates 

4. College readiness 

5. Postsecondary enrollment 

6. Enrollment in Advanced Placement (AP) 

courses 

7. Performance in AP courses 

8. Additional measures related to readiness for 

college, career, and life in a globally 

competitive economy 

9. District and accountability ratings 

10. Attendance rates 

11. Four-year completion rates 

12. Annual dropout rates 


September 

2012 111

Budget Development Process 

The budgeting process is comprised of three 

major phases: planning, preparation and 

evaluation. 

During the planning stage, the district’s goals and 

objectives are reviewed, evaluated and modified if 

necessary to make sure they are congruent to the 

district’s overall mission. At this point, senior 

members of the Cabinet meet to discuss strategic 

planning issues, goals and initiatives for the 

coming year as well as challenges and 

opportunities facing the district. Fundamental 

projections in the tax base and changes in funding 

levels received are closely examined. Interaction 

with key stakeholders, including the Board of 

Trustees, principals, parents, and community 

involvement groups, district advisory committees, 

citizen budget review committees, employee 

organizations, and the public at-large, is 

encouraged as a means to understand their 

priorities, needs, and concerns, and at the same 

time to inform them about the issues affecting the 

district, including available resources. Staff begins 

with the previous year’s budget calendar and 

modifies it for use in the current year. The 

calendar lists critical dates for preparation, 

submission, meetings with key stakeholders, 

committees, community and Board of Trustees to 

discuss the preliminary budget, public hearings 

and adoption. Presented in the next page is the 

budget calendar for the FY2013 budget 

development process. 

The budget preparation process begins with the 

Board adopting budget parameters, budget 

assumptions, priorities, and staffing guidelines. 

The Budget Office staff holds budget workshops to 

discuss any changes in the coming year budget 

process and to distribute the budget package to 

schools and departments. Information on student 

enrollment, weighted pupil allocation, staffing and 

non-staffing allocations as well as supplemental 

allocations for special programs is included in the 

budget package. The basic premise for campus 

allocations is to give principals greater flexibility 

and control over resources while ensuring that the 

district’s funds flow to campuses according to 

their program needs and projected student 

enrollment. For departmental budgets, 

justifications are required for all non-salary 

budget requests. Food Service budgets are 

prepared by the Food Service Executive 

Director whereas the Debt Service budgets are 

prepared by the Executive Director of Finance. 

Capital Projects budgets are developed on a 

multi-year basis and are prepared by the 

Construction Management department. 

Review of the campus budgets takes place first 

with the Campus Advisory Committees. The 

campus budgets are then sent to the Associate 

Superintendents for their review and approval 

before being forwarded to the Budget Office for 

processing. Departmental budgets require an 

approval signature of their area chief. The 

district Senior Cabinet reviews all budget 

increases, requests, and instructs the Budget 

Office to process only those that are 

recommended by them. The Chief Finance 

Officer and/or the Superintendent present the 

preliminary budget to the Citizen’s Budget Task 

Force, community and Board of Trustees. 

Several informational meetings are held within 

the community and public hearings are 

conducted in April and June. The recommended 

budgets are approved in mid to late June. 

The budget is evaluated for its effectiveness in 

attaining goals and objectives. Evaluation 

typically involves an examination of how funds 

were expended, what outcomes resulted from 

the expenditure of funds, and to what degree 

these outcomes achieved the objectives stated 

during the planning phase. The evaluation 

phase is important in determining the following 

year’s budgetary allocations. 

In summary, budget preparation is not a onetime 

exercise to determine how a school district 

will allocate funds. Rather, school district budget 

preparation is part of a continuous cycle of 

planning and evaluation to achieve district 

goals. 


September 

2012 112

Table 49 


FY2013 Budget Development Process 

Sept 2011 Board Budget Parameters Adopted April 2012 Community Conversation on 


Oct 2011 Board Approves FY2013 Budget 

Calendar 

Staff Conversation on 


Nov 2011 Board Reviews Assumptions, 

Staffing Formulas, Enrollment 

Board Discussion on Preliminary 

Projections, Staffing Guidelines 

FY2013 Budget and Rate 

and Fund Balance Condition 

Board Determines Strategic Plan 

Priorities 

Superintendent presents the 

Revised FY2013 Budget based 

on Community & Board Feedback 

Board Action on Facilities Master 

Plan Framework 

Public Hearing on FY2013 

Revised Budget 

Dec 2011 Revised Financial Forecast for May 2012 Travis Central Appraisal District 

FY2013-2015 

provides Preliminary Appraisal 

Values 

Board Action on Annual Facilities 

Recommendations June 2012 Superintendent presents the 

Recommended FY2013 Expenditure 

Jan 2012 Budget Office Compiles Budget Budget to the Board, Public and 

Media 

Feb 2012 Superintendent presents the 

Preliminary FY2013 to the Board, 


Public and Media 

on FY2013 Recommended Budget 

Mar 2012 Community Conversation on Board Approval of FY2013 


Recommended Expenditure Budget 

July 2012 

Travis Central Appraisal District 

Certifies Appraisal Values 

Aug 2012 


on Proposed Budget and Tax Rate 

Board Adopts the FY2013 Budget 

and FY2013 Tax Rate 


September 

2012 113

Budget Administration and Management Process 

The Adopted Budget provides authority to expend funds for the purpose indicated and in accordance with 

State law, Board policy, and the district’s approved purchasing procedures. The expenditure of funds 

shall be under the direction of the Superintendent or designee who shall ensure that funds are expended 

in accordance with the Adopted Budget. 

The district installed an accounting system that meets the requirements prescribed by State Board of 

Education and conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. A report of revenues and 

expenditures include management, cost accounting and financial information that enable management 

and staff to monitor the funding process and determine education costs by district, campus and program. 

Budget monitoring is done not only by staff in the Budget Office, but also by the entire district’s 

administrators. The Chief Financial Officer and other district administrators use similar expenditure and 

encumbrance reports to monitor the budget compliance of programs and funds. Annualized budget 

summaries which project the impact of current expenditures on year-end results are useful in this effort. 

Reporting to Texas Education Agency (TEA) 

The AISD budgets are submitted to TEA via the Public Education Information Management System 

(PEIMS) transmission process as of the date established in the annual instructions for the system. TEA 

monitors for compliance at the district level only. This monitoring is a legal requirement to ensure 

mandatory expenditure levels in certain areas. In addition, Amended Budgets are reflected on the 

schedule comparing budget and actual results in the annual financial and compliance audit report of 

which the district has met all requirements mandated by TEA. 

Amending the Budget 

Budget amendment occurs when a change is made increasing any one of the functional spending 

categories or increasing revenue object accounts and other resources. The district prepares monthly 

financial reports to include all budget amendments for budgeted funds including General Fund, Food 

Service Fund, Debt Service Fund and the Capital Projects Fund. These budget changes are usually the 

result of unexpected levels of expenditures in certain categories and must be amended in the budget for 

legal compliance. All budget amendments in the monthly financial reports are prepared at fund and 

functional levels and required to be adopted by the last day of the fiscal year. 

All necessary budget amendments are formally adopted by the School Board and recorded in the Board 

Minutes. 

Purchasing 

The district’s Purchasing Department is responsible for all bids. All district contracts, except contracts for 

the purchase of produce or vehicle fuel, valued at $50,000 or more in the aggregate for each 12-month 

period, are made by the method that provides the best value for the district: 

Competitive bidding. 

Competitive sealed proposals. 

A request for proposals for services other than construction services. 

An inter-local contract. 

The reverse auction procedure as defined by Government Code 2155.062(d). 

The formation of a political subdivision corporation under Local Government Code 304.001. 


September 

2012 114

Purchasing (continued) 

For supplies, equipment and services costing less than $10,000 in the aggregate over a 12-month period, 

the district follows the following procedures: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whenever available, needed items are requisitioned from the Materials Management Warehouse. 

Items that are not available from the Materials Management warehouse will be purchased 

through established supply agreements with outside vendors when possible. 

Purchases of items or services not available from the warehouse or established supply 

agreements, costing less than $1,000, are made in the most expeditious manner, based upon a 

single quote. 

Written quotations solicited by facsimile from at least three vendors, if possible, are secured for 

purchases of $1,000 or more, but less than $10,000. Each vendor is furnished with written 

specifications. Written quotes include freight costs, i.e., FOB destination, freight prepaid and 

allowed. 

When quotes cannot be obtained, sole source purchases will be documented. Items or services 

that are only available from one source are supported by written documentation and approved by 

an area chief. 

No commitment for goods or services (other than activity fund purchases) can be made without a 

valid purchase order being issued by the Purchasing Office. 

Purchases of $10,000 or more generally require formal bids and advertising. Purchases of this 

magnitude are made through the Purchasing Office. 

The district implemented a procurement cards (P-cards) system in September 2010. 

The Adopted Budget provides authority to expend funds for the purposes indicated and in accordance 

with State law, Board policy, and the district’s approved purchasing procedures. The expenditure of funds 

shall be under the direction of the Superintendent or his or her designee. 

Reporting to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) 

The district submits its Annual Budget, student attendance information, and its end-of-year financial 

status through a system called Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS). Transmission 

dates are established by TEA. The PEIMS system collects the same types of information from all Texas 

public schools, processes them and provides to end users a rich data base of information for benchmark 

comparison purposes and/or for any other statistical analysis research works. 


September 

2012 115



September 

2012 116


Financial 

Overview


Financial Overview 

The Financial Section provides specific fiscal information regarding the various funds of the district. By law, 

the Board of Trustees must approve annual budgets for the General Fund, Food Service Funds, and Debt 

Service Fund. These three funds make up the Governmental Funds. 

A pyramid approach is used, starting with The Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for all 

Governmental Funds for the official budget year FY2013 and for the five-year summary from FY2009 

through FY2013, followed with the presentation of individual funds. 


September 

2012 117

Budget Analysis 

The budget that the Board is required to take action on is comprised of the three primary funds, known as the 

Governmental Funds, which are the General Fund, Food Service Fund, and Debt Service Fund. 

Special Revenue Funds, Capital Project Funds and Proprietary Funds are provided for informational purposes 

only. Special Revenue Funds are approved separately by the Board of Trustees when final grant awards are 

made. Capital Projects Funds have been previously authorized through the bond election process. 

The district’s budget is organized in the following fund categories: 

General Fund 

Used to pay for salaries and benefits, classroom resources, keeping schools clean and landscapes 

maintained, transporting students, paying utility bills, providing clerical and administrative support – all the 

things a school needs when it opens its doors. 


Used for the operation of the district’s food service program. 


Used to pay off bonds previously approved by district voters or building construction and renovation. 

Special Revenue Fund (Grants) 

Used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources such as federal categorical, state or locally 

financed programs where unused balances are returned to the grant. These funds are tied to specific 

programmatic deliverables and expenditure restrictions. 


Proprietary funds focus on the determination of operating income, changes in net assets (or cost recovery), 

financial position and cash flows. Proprietary funds report an activity for which a fee is charge to external users 

for good or services. Internal service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one 

department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental unit, or to other governmental 

units, on a cost-reimbursable basis. Examples of the district’s proprietary funds include the employee health 

insurance fund, worker’s compensation fund, the print shop, laundry services, and the print shop. 


The budget that the Board is required to take action on is comprised of the three primary funds, known as the 

Governmental Funds, which are the General Fund, Food Service Fund, and Debt Service Fund. The FY2013 

total governmental expenditures are projected to be $979.5 million. The total revenues for these funds are 

approximately $950.5 million. The planned deficits will be covered with the fund balance reserves. Revenue is 

expected to decrease by $21.9 million or 2.25 percent and expenditures will increase by $5.2 million or 0.54 

percent over the prior year adopted budget. 


September 

2012 118

Table 50 


All Governmental Funds 

Combined Statement of Revenue and Expenditures for FY2013 

FY2012 

Governmental 

Adopted Total 

General Fund 

Food 

Service Fund 

Debt 

Service Fund 

Revenues 

5700 Local Sources $742,072,311 $ 677,368,777 $ 8,392,715 $ 101,297,021 $ 787,058,513 

5800 State Sources 171,448,575 110,259,107 1,146,327 - 111,405,434 

5900 Federal Sources 58,916,699 20,386,584 30,675,778 984,466 52,046,828 

Combined Fund Revenue Total $972,437,585 $808,014,468 $40,214,820 $102,281,487 $950,510,775 

Expenditures 

11 Instruction $419,734,596 $ 432,107,452 $ - $ - $ 432,107,452 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 11,321,673 10,785,702 - - 10,785,702 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 16,259,504 16,394,100 - - 16,394,100 

21 Instructional Administration 9,795,691 10,194,410 - - 10,194,410 

23 School Administration 46,812,796 47,911,053 - - 47,911,053 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 18,726,353 19,694,749 - - 19,694,749 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 2,970,687 2,906,651 - - 2,906,651 

33 Health Services 5,946,564 6,131,553 - - 6,131,553 

34 Pupil Transportation 24,488,580 27,109,548 - - 27,109,548 

35 Food Services 38,297,927 - 39,245,441 - 39,245,441 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 13,262,821 13,376,167 - - 13,376,167 

41 General Administration 17,064,813 18,248,506 - - 18,248,506 

51 Plant Maintenance 78,925,932 79,012,294 1,551,835 - 80,564,129 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 9,577,526 9,897,984 - - 9,897,984 

53 Data Processing Services 17,244,095 17,803,638 - - 17,803,638 

61 Community Services 4,426,066 4,627,381 - - 4,627,381 

71 Debt Services 96,967,282 877,565 - 102,744,114 103,621,679 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 1,320,000 1,320,000 - - 1,320,000 

91 Contracted Instructional Srvcs-Public Schools 135,176,524 111,739,859 - - 111,739,859 

93 Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,233,902 1,658,106 - - 1,658,106 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 4,717,540 4,164,661 - - 4,164,661 

Combined Fund Expenditure Total $ 974,270,872 $ 835,961,379 $ 40,797,276 $ 102,744,114 $ 979,502,769 

Net Revenue Over (Under) $ (1,833,287) $ (27,946,911) $ (582,456) $ (462,627) $ (28,991,994) 


7900 Other Resources 51,000 51,000 - 51,000 

8900 Other Uses (81,000) (81,000) - (81,000) 

Net Sources Over (Under) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ - $ - $ (30,000) 

Net Revenue/Sources Over (Under) $ (1,863,287) $ (27,976,911) $ (582,456) $ (462,627) $ (29,021,994) 


unspent balances at year end $ 30,064,925 


Total 

Beginning Fund Balance (Estimated) $ 249,470,708 $ 248,072,693 $ 8,760,016 $ 20,839,642 $ 277,672,346 


Less Assigned Balance (48,983,942) (35,530,274) - - (35,530,274) 



Expenditures 23% 22% 20% 20% 22% 


September 

2012 119

Table 51 



Combined Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for 

FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years 

FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 

(Decrease) Over 

Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 


Taxes- Current Year Levy $ 697,204,001 $ 727,171,964 $ 724,397,554 $ 721,766,364 $ 764,035,890 $ 42,269,526 5.86% 

Taxes- Prior Years 3,447,783 3,712,168 4,795,397 3,525,000 4,861,915 1,336,915 37.93% 

Penalty & Interest 3,470,074 3,712,753 3,709,002 3,444,537 3,794,387 349,850 10.16% 

Tuition & Fees 800,677 658,611 692,699 700,000 1,570,955 870,955 124.42% 

Athletic Activities 634,287 678,995 729,294 640,900 743,880 102,980 16.07% 

Earnings from Investments 3,646,431 853,314 712,398 800,000 616,167 (183,833) -22.98% 

Gifts and Bequests 197,958 64,049 25,230 141,066 - (141,066) -100.00% 

Insurance Recovery 1,255,393 16,333 2,333,537 100,000 - (100,000) 0.00% 

Erate Reimbursement 379,544 - - - - - 0.00% 

Rent Revenues 784,573 938,128 1,157,557 1,014,768 1,014,768 - 0.00% 

School Lunches 8,052,659 7,778,220 7,602,802 8,148,083 8,314,262 166,179 2.04% 

Other Revenues -Local Sources 1,842,795 2,510,922 3,123,877 1,791,593 2,106,289 314,696 17.57% 

TOTAL 721,716,175 748,095,457 749,279,347 742,072,311 787,058,513 44,986,202 6.06% 

STATE REVENUE SOURCES 

Per Capita Apportionment 19,252,679 9,075,326 25,432,653 19,081,728 47,073,537 27,991,809 146.69% 

Foundation School Program 167,662,657 89,130,638 109,384,215 121,088,928 33,053,978 (88,034,950) -72.70% 

Prior Year State Rev Adjustments 201,806 - - - - - 0.00% 

Other State Revenue 76,396 257,107 242,268 100,000 - (100,000) -100.00% 

State Program Revenue 243,818 385,537 409,626 247,313 347,313 100,000 40.43% 

TRS on Behalf (Book Entry Only) 29,821,337 28,234,541 28,335,185 30,930,606 30,930,606 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 217,258,693 127,083,149 163,803,947 171,448,575 111,405,434 (60,043,141) -35.02% 


Federal Indirect Costs 1,746,954 2,224,404 2,310,644 1,600,000 2,163,595 563,595 35.22% 

State Stabilization Funds - 22,187,440 24,280,941 - - - 0.00% 

Federal Revenue Through TEA 242,235 256,426 244,110 13,985,672 199,000 (13,786,672) -98.58% 

School Breakfast Program 5,336,244 5,713,018 6,021,014 5,916,389 6,093,881 177,492 3.00% 

National School Lunch Program 19,507,701 21,029,117 21,607,380 21,628,537 22,277,393 648,856 3.00% 

USDA Donated Commodities 1,164,566 1,226,842 1,736,715 1,226,842 1,245,245 18,403 1.50% 

After School Snack Program 389,982 369,913 245,275 389,982 389,982 - 0.00% 

Other Federal Revenues 669,276 524,050 - 669,277 669,277 - 0.00% 

Building America Bond Subsidy - - 886,020 - 984,466 984,466 0.00% 

School Health & Related Services 1,300,610 13,551,585 15,596,597 13,500,000 18,023,989 4,523,989 33.51% 

TOTAL 30,357,568 67,082,795 72,928,696 58,916,699 52,046,828 (6,869,871) -11.66% 

GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS REV TOTAL $ 969,332,436 $ 942,261,401 $ 986,011,990 $ 972,437,585 $ 950,510,775 $ (21,926,810) -2.25% 


September 

2012 120






FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

EXPENDITURES 


Payroll Costs 374,167,504 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 


Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 

$ $ 385,805,005 $ 386,873,807 $ 407,741,402 $ 412,159,712 $ 4,418,310 1.08% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 3,020,317 2,875,426 3,071,985 3,014,320 8,593,458 5,579,138 185.09% 

Supplies & Materials 8,303,621 7,699,780 8,061,160 8,240,693 10,397,545 2,156,852 26.17% 

Other Operating Expenses 1,315,981 1,035,337 920,431 738,181 956,737 218,556 29.61% 

Capital Outlay 213,294 135,475 373,993 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 387,020,717 397,551,023 399,301,376 419,734,596 432,107,452 12,372,856 2.95% 

12 Instructional Resource & Media 

Payroll Costs 10,919,363 11,106,268 10,664,810 9,942,010 9,421,612 (520,398) -5.23% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 181,602 250,866 205,514 226,638 229,166 2,528 1.12% 

Supplies & Materials 3,274,943 1,252,666 1,264,160 1,073,832 1,054,537 (19,295) -1.80% 

Other Operating Expenses 89,952 36,406 20,530 32,193 33,387 1,194 3.71% 

Capital Outlay 108,627 6,025 93,739 47,000 47,000 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 14,574,487 12,652,231 12,248,753 11,321,673 10,785,702 (535,971) -4.73% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 

Payroll Costs 11,297,458 13,727,720 12,134,669 14,358,628 14,284,725 (73,903) -0.51% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 1,176,021 1,339,679 600,834 668,139 648,310 (19,829) -2.97% 

Supplies & Materials 748,757 887,611 663,275 791,473 876,258 84,785 10.71% 

Other Operating Expenses 1,465,275 1,040,989 912,194 441,264 584,807 143,543 32.53% 

Capital Outlay 5,130 - - - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 14,692,641 16,995,999 14,310,972 16,259,504 16,394,100 134,596 0.83% 

21 Instructional Administration 

Payroll Costs 8,906,728 8,941,999 8,105,239 7,507,017 7,882,898 375,881 5.01% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 1,081,081 1,058,876 969,223 1,318,573 1,321,525 2,952 0.22% 



Capital Outlay 16,769 19,800 - - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 11,041,576 10,800,228 9,673,933 9,795,691 10,194,410 398,719 4.07% 

23 School Administration 

Payroll Costs 44,727,831 45,941,750 46,292,718 46,379,903 47,479,076 1,099,173 2.37% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 131,659 160,446 181,774 148,176 127,035 (21,141) -14.27% 



TOTAL 45,466,644 46,634,597 46,971,583 46,812,796 47,911,053 1,098,257 2.35% 


September 

2012 121






FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 


Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 

31 Guidance and Counseling 

Payroll Costs 16,965,762 17,816,842 18,298,872 17,415,427 18,121,447 706,020 4.05% 




Capital Outlay - - 6,676 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 18,421,332 19,054,859 19,417,443 18,726,353 19,694,749 968,396 5.17% 

32 Social Services 

Payroll Costs 2,543,099 2,661,990 2,982,912 2,638,146 2,573,625 (64,521) -2.45% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 140,250 210,998 34,103 303,792 303,792 - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials 25,786 15,381 10,965 18,687 19,172 485 2.60% 

Other Operating Expenses 30,498 5,517 12,816 10,062 10,062 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 2,739,633 2,893,886 3,040,796 2,970,687 2,906,651 (64,036) -2.16% 

33 Health Services 

Payroll Costs 526,125 530,352 554,950 537,452 550,391 12,939 2.41% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 4,825,064 4,586,578 5,149,995 5,367,312 5,539,412 172,100 3.21% 

Supplies & Materials 17,671 12,553 37,894 41,800 41,750 (50) -0.12% 

Other Operating Expenses 3,677 2,710 1,729 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 5,372,537 5,132,193 5,744,568 5,946,564 6,131,553 184,989 3.11% 

34 Student Transportation 

Payroll Costs 22,836,996 23,495,865 23,595,642 21,951,643 23,664,728 1,713,085 7.80% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 1,132,216 249,953 211,716 206,500 209,500 3,000 1.45% 

Supplies & Materials 2,432,793 2,701,825 3,535,235 3,178,417 4,117,600 939,183 29.55% 

Other Operating Expenses (835,744) (973,414) (1,037,878) (847,980) (882,280) (34,300) 4.04% 

Capital Outlay 8,995 - 107,050 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 25,575,256 25,474,229 26,411,765 24,488,580 27,109,548 2,620,968 10.70% 

35 Food Services 

Payroll Costs 20,908,710 20,998,757 21,816,949 22,297,646 22,828,349 530,703 2.38% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 588,127 530,913 626,809 730,997 730,997 - 0.00% 




TOTAL 35,630,455 36,087,111 37,665,766 38,297,927 39,245,441 947,514 2.47% 


September 

2012 122






FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 


Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 

Payroll Costs 9,931,624 10,825,419 10,786,996 10,281,910 10,355,084 73,174 0.71% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 1,029,038 1,136,495 1,124,819 920,262 1,074,350 154,088 16.74% 

Supplies & Materials 1,090,240 1,109,453 1,062,674 971,686 872,475 (99,211) -10.21% 

Other Operating Expenses 1,394,785 1,403,577 1,519,669 1,088,963 1,074,258 (14,705) -1.35% 

Capital Outlay 210,608 129,153 38,001 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 13,656,295 14,604,097 14,532,159 13,262,821 13,376,167 113,346 0.85% 

41 General Administration 

Payroll Costs 14,029,715 13,403,330 13,572,186 13,975,151 14,463,666 488,515 3.50% 



Other Operating Expenses 1,059,930 861,772 409,400 879,925 1,269,557 389,632 44.28% 

Capital Outlay - - 6,240 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 18,325,386 17,124,549 16,532,883 17,064,813 18,248,506 1,183,693 6.94% 

51 Plant Maintenance & Operations 

Payroll Costs 42,625,397 41,690,215 40,510,744 41,153,819 42,462,295 1,308,476 3.18% 



Other Operating Expenses 1,739,835 2,233,347 1,639,474 1,729,553 1,707,055 (22,498) -1.30% 


TOTAL 81,774,183 80,970,336 78,591,773 78,925,932 80,564,129 1,638,197 2.08% 

52 Security & Monitoring Serviees 

Payroll Costs 8,573,494 8,863,239 8,417,648 9,029,501 9,348,958 319,457 3.54% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 78,276 65,255 70,224 87,858 88,358 500 0.57% 


Other Operating Expenses 110,415 71,607 84,900 50,325 50,326 1 0.00% 


TOTAL 9,615,305 9,466,965 9,028,579 9,577,526 9,897,984 320,458 3.35% 

53 Data Proccessing Services 

Payroll Costs 10,739,629 10,837,656 10,431,465 11,078,514 11,638,057 559,543 5.05% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 3,623,466 3,082,208 2,848,895 2,859,366 2,859,366 - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials 4,108,525 3,580,927 4,809,026 3,255,056 3,255,056 - 0.00% 



TOTAL 18,816,393 17,841,016 18,498,507 17,244,095 17,803,638 559,543 3.24% 


September 

2012 123






FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 


Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 

61 Community Services 

Payroll Costs 4,876,332 4,704,715 4,512,651 3,447,906 3,610,771 162,865 4.72% 




TOTAL 5,886,756 5,605,139 5,389,892 4,426,066 4,627,381 201,315 4.55% 


Bond Principal 37,452,633 45,112,633 52,617,633 58,697,347 50,898,305 (7,799,042) -13.29% 

Bond Interest 32,352,780 34,671,258 35,122,926 36,148,032 50,770,809 14,622,777 40.45% 

Debt Service - General Fund 1,122,270 1,129,300 1,129,400 1,046,903 877,565 (169,338) -16.18% 

Other Debt Serv Fees 236,725 418,768 893,547 1,075,000 1,075,000 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 71,164,408 81,331,959 89,763,506 96,967,282 103,621,679 6,654,397 6.86% 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 

Payroll Costs - - 3,512 - - - 0.00% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 579,618 610,402 604,301 1,320,000 1,320,000 - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials 26,768 26,501 26,501 - - - 0.00% 

Other Operating Expenses 31,388 22,989 9,419 - - - 0.00% 

Capital Outlay 4,576,987 1,868,125 1,457,723 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 5,214,761 2,528,017 2,101,456 1,320,000 1,320,000 - 0.00% 

91 Contracted Srvcs Between Public Schools 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 177,664,513 111,937,679 123,774,675 135,176,524 111,739,859 (23,436,665) -17.34% 

TOTAL 177,664,513 111,937,679 123,774,675 135,176,524 111,739,859 (23,436,665) -17.34% 

93 Payments For Shared Svcs 

Other Operating Expenses 1,244,061 1,700,441 1,658,106 1,233,902 1,658,106 424,204 34.38% 

TOTAL 1,244,061 1,700,441 1,658,106 1,233,902 1,658,106 424,204 34.38% 


Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 3,843,994 3,953,241 4,150,819 4,717,540 4,164,661 (552,879) -11.72% 

TOTAL 3,843,994 3,953,241 4,150,819 4,717,540 4,164,661 (552,879) -11.72% 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 967,741,333 920,339,795 938,809,312 974,270,872 979,502,769 5,231,897 0.53% 


September 

2012 124






FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 


Prior Year 

% Increase 


Prior Year 

OTHER SOURCES 

Loan Proceeds 64,129 - - - - - 0.00% 

Premium/Discount on Bonds - 1,135,854 - - - - 0.00% 

Prepaid Interest 448,268 - - - - - 0.00% 

Sale of Bonds - 9,587,996 - - - - 0.00% 

Operating Transfer In 1,394,910 - - - - - 0.00% 

Sale of Real Property - 196,725 80,025 51,000 51,000 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 1,907,307 10,920,575 80,025 51,000 51,000 - 0.00% 

OTHER USES 

Legal Settlement 217,284 109,050 54,896 81,000 81,000 - 0.00% 

Other Uses - Debt Service Fund - 10,611,457 - - - - 0.00% 

Operating Transfer Out 5,054,461 - 48,182 - - - 0.00% 

TOTAL 5,271,745 10,720,507 103,078 81,000 81,000 - 0.00% 

NET REVENUE/SOURCES OVER (UNDER) OVER 

(3,364,438) 200,068 (23,053) (30,000) (30,000) - 0.00% 

(UNDER) 

(1,773,335) 22,121,674 47,179,625 (1,863,287) (29,021,994) (27,158,707) 1457.57% 

ESTIMATED OUTSTANDING PURCHASE 

ORDERS AND UNSPENT BALANCES AT 

YEAR END 

30,064,925 

FUNDING BALANCES-SEPT 1 (BEGINNING) 181,942,744 180,169,409 202,291,083 249,470,708 277,672,346 28,201,638 11.30% 

FUNDING BALANCES-AUG 31 (ENDING) 180,169,409 202,291,083 249,470,708 277,672,346 248,650,352 (29,021,994) -10.45% 

LESS ASSIGNED BALANCE (25,279,819) (23,808,573) (39,038,247) (48,983,942) (35,530,274) 13,453,668 -27.47% 

ENDING FUND BALANCE - UNASSIGNED $ 154,889,590 $ 178,482,510 $ 210,432,461 $ 228,688,404 $ 213,120,078 $ (15,568,326) -6.81% 

Ending Fund Balance as a % of Total 

Budget Expenditures 

16% 19% 22% 23% 22% 


September 

2012 125

As illustrated in the following table, the General Fund accounts for 85 percent of Governmental Fund 

revenues and 85 percent of total Governmental Fund expenditures for FY2013. The Debt Service Fund 

accounts for 11 percent of the revenues and 11 percent of the expenditures and the Food Services fund 

accounts for 4 percent of total revenues and expenditures. The majority of General and Debt Service 

Fund revenues are generated through local tax collections. 

Table 52 



Revenue and Expenditure Adopted Budget for FY2013 

Governmental Funds Revenue Budget 

General Fund 

$808,014,468 

85% 

Food Service 

Fund 

$40,214,820 

4% 

Debt Service 

Fund 

$102,281,487 

11% 

Governmental Funds Expenditure Budget 

General Fund 

$835,961,379 

85% 

Food Service 

Fund 

$40,797,276 

4% 

Debt Service 

Fund 

$102,744,114 

11% 


September 

2012 126

These tables do not isolate the $111.7 million Chapter 41 payment the district must pay to the state. As 

illustrated in the below table, when Recapture is taken into consideration, the General Fund still 

constitutes the largest portion of the Governmental Funds representing $724.2 million or 74 percent of the 

share. Recapture, or Chapter 41, constitutes the next largest share at $111.7 million or 11 percent. The 

Debt Service Fund represents 11 percent and the Food Service Fund represents 4 percent of the 

Governmental Funds. 

Table 53 


FY2013 Adopted Expenditure Budget for Three Primary Funds and Recapture 

General Fund 

724,221,520 

74% 

Food Service 

40,797,276 

4% 

Debt Service 

102,744,114 

11% 

Chapter 41 

111,739,859 

11% 

What is Recapture? 

Recapture, which represents 11 percent of the district’s Governmental Funds, is a function of Chapter 41 

of the Texas Education Code which equalizes wealth for educational spending. The Chapter 41 provision 

is intended to “Recapture” local tax dollars from “property-rich” districts and redistribute the funds to 

“property-poor” districts. Under this law, golden pennies represent the six cents that property-rich school 

districts like AISD are allowed to retain in revenue above the one-dollar tax that is assessed on all taxable 

property values. Any revenue collected on property taxes above these six cents is subject to Recapture 

by the state. In other words, in FY2012, nearly 45.3 percent of the revenue generated beyond the 6 cents 

is sent to the state for redistribution to property-poor school districts. In FY2012, nearly one fifth or 20 

percent of all local revenue collected from property taxes is subject to recapture. In FY2013, the district 

projects a slight reduction in recapture; approximately 16.7 percent of all local revenue collected will be 

subject to Recapture and 43 percent of the revenue generated beyond the 6 cents will be subject to 

Recapture. 

It is projected that Austin ISD will submit $111.7 million to the state in Recapture funds for FY2013. This 

amount represents a decrease of approximately $23.5 million as compared to the FY2012 Recapture 

payments of $135.2 million. Over the past ten years, Austin ISD has paid the State of Texas almost $1.4 

billion in Recapture payments. 


September 

2012 127

Table 54 


Recapture Payments Compared to General Fund Expenditure Budget 

FY2013 with Comparative Data for Ten Years 

$1,000,000,000 

$800,000,000 

$600,000,000 

$400,000,000 

$200,000,000 

$0 


Total GF Budget 

Chapter 41 Payments 

General Fund 

General Fund: Where the Money Comes From 

Out of the funds that AISD manages, the largest is the General Fund. AISD’s General Fund is used to 

support the operation of the school system and is comprised of three major sources: local, state, and 

federal. The General Fund is commonly referred to as the “Operating Fund” or “Local Maintenance 

Fund”. State aid and local property tax revenue are major sources of revenues for this fund. 

Local Funding 

Local funding consists of property taxes for the current year or prior years, investment earnings, athletic 

activities revenue, insurance recovery, grants, and school bonds. Local revenue accounts for $677.4 

million or 83.8 percent of all available sources of funding for the FY2013 General Fund budget. Of this 

amount, the largest source of revenue is $671.6 million in local property taxes, which is derived from the 

current and delinquent property tax payments. The FY2013 Adopted Budget predicts a 6.1 percent 

increase in total local revenue sources as compared to the prior year FY2012 Adopted Budget. 

State Funding 

State funding is based on a complex formula, determined by the legislature, which considers the number 

of students served, and is based on poverty levels, attendance rates, special programs, bilingual factors, 

taxable property wealth, and other factors. State revenue accounts for $110.3 million, or 13.6 percent of 

the total revenues of the General Fund budget. State funding will decrease by $60 million, or 35.3 percent 

from the prior FY2012 Adopted Budget. Of the $110.3 million in state revenue, approximately $30 million 

are TRS on behalf payments, which are not part of the state funding formula. In FY2013, Austin ISD will 

actually pay more to the state than it will receive in state aid due to the changes in the school funding 

formula passed by the previous legislature. 


September 

2012 128

Table 55 


State Funding Sources 



FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 



Adopted 


State Revenue $ 170,302,248 $ 110,259,107 100.00% $ (60,043,141) -35.26% 

Less: 

Recapture (135,176,524) (111,739,859) 101.3% 23,436,665 -17.34% 

TRS On Behalf Payments (30,031,592) (30,031,592) 27.2% - 0.00% 

Net State Operating Revenue $ 5,094,132 $ (31,512,344) -28.58% $ (36,606,476) -718.6% 

Federal Funding 

Federal funding, reflected in the General Fund, constitutes earnings from indirect cost from federal grant 

expenditures, and revenues received for school health and related services (SHARS), a Medicaid 

reimbursement program. The district has limited flexibility in how it spends federal revenue (and a portion 

of state revenue). Federal sources account for $20.4 million or 2.5 percent of the total revenue of the 

General Fund budget. The largest source of federal funding is the School Health and Related Services 

program, which represents $18 million. The district will not receive any additional funding in FY2013 from 

the one year Edujobs Grant, which provided $13.8 million in federal revenue in FY2012. Federal revenue 

is estimated to decrease by $8.7 million or 29.9 percent from the prior year adopted budget as a result of 

this loss. 

Table 56 


Revenue Sources 



FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 



Adopted 


Local Revenue $ 638,484,837 $ 677,368,777 83.8% $ 38,883,940 6.1% 

State Revenue 170,302,248 110,259,107 13.6% (60,043,141) -35.3% 

Federal Revenue 29,085,672 20,386,584 2.5% (8,699,088) -29.9% 

Total 837,872,757 808,014,468 100.0% (29,858,289) -3.6% 

Less: Recapture 135,176,524 111,739,859 13.8% (23,436,665) -17.3% 

Operating Revenue $ 702,696,233 $ 696,274,609 86.2% $ (6,421,624) -0.9% 

As discussed above, the vast majority of the district’s funds come from local sources mainly derived from 

local tax collections. 

The following table depicts actual revenue received and forecasted revenue for local, state, and federal 

sources. Although AISD enrollment has risen steadily in the past and is projected to continue, there has 

not been a direct correlation in student growth and revenue growth. Both local revenue and state aid have 

fluctuated up and down historically. 


September 

2012 129

$000 Millions 

$1,000 

Table 57 


Historical Comparison of Revenue Sources 


$900 

$800 

$771 

$873 $877 

$860 

$807 

$834 $838 

$808 

$834 

$849 

$700 

$640 $651 

$600 

$500 

$400 

$300 

$200 

$100 

$- 

FY2004 

Actual 

FY2005 

Actual 

FY2006 

Actual 

FY2007 

Actual 

FY2008 

Actual 

FY2009 

Actual 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 


Adopted 

FY2014 

Forecast 

FY2015 

Forecast 

Total $639.52 $650.83 $770.95 $873.28 $877.34 $860.38 $807.26 $833.94 $837.87 $808.01 $833.50 $849.08 

5700 Local $582.68 $590.84 $685.60 $729.37 $642.51 $640.98 $664.83 $653.11 $638.48 $677.37 $691.61 $706.16 

5800 State $54.53 $57.42 $58.16 $118.58 $207.52 $216.15 $126.02 $162.68 $170.30 $110.26 $120.82 $121.16 

5900 Federal $2.32 $2.56 $27.20 $25.33 $27.31 $3.24 $16.41 $18.15 $29.09 $20.39 $21.08 $21.76 


September 

2012 130

Where the Money Goes 

AISD continues to ensure that resources are spent primarily on support for schools and students. 

Approximately 59.7 percent of the General Fund revenue is allocated directly towards instruction (shown 

below). A significant portion of AISD’s budget is also spent on maintenance and facilities. General 

Administration represents just 2.5 percent of the General Fund budget. 

Table 58 


FY2013 Adopted Operations Budget by Functional Area (General Fund) 

Chapter 41 Excluded 

Functional Area 


Adopted Budget % of Budget 

Instruction 432,107,452 59.7% 

Instructional Resources & Media Services 10,785,702 1.5% 

Curriculum & Staff Development 16,394,100 2.3% 

Instructional Administration 10,194,410 1.4% 

School Administration 47,911,053 6.6% 

Guidance & Counseling Services 19,694,749 2.7% 

Attendance & Social Work Services 2,906,651 0.4% 

Health Services 6,131,553 0.8% 

Pupil Transportation 27,109,548 3.7% 

Co-Curricular Activities 13,376,167 1.8% 

Subtotal Instruction and Student Support 586,611,385 81.0% 

General Administration 18,248,506 2.5% 

Community Services 4,627,381 0.6% 

Subtotal Central & Community Services 22,875,887 3.2% 

Plant Maintenance 79,012,294 10.9% 

Security & Monitoring Services 9,897,984 1.4% 

Data Processing Services 17,803,638 2.5% 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction 1,320,000 0.2% 

Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,658,106 0.2% 

Debt Services 877,565 0.1% 

Other Intergovernmental Charges 4,164,661 0.6% 

Subtotal Operations & Infrastructure 114,734,248 15.8% 

Grand Total 724,221,520 100.0% 


September 

2012 131

Table 59 


FY2013 Adopted Budget by Functional Area (General Fund) 

General 


2.5% 

Guidance & 

Counseling 

Services 2.7% 


Services 2.5% 

Curriculum & Staff 

Development 

2.3% 

Pupil 


3.7% 

School 


6.6% 

Plant 

Maintenance 

10.9% 

Instruction 

59.7% 

Instruction 

School Administration 

Guidance & Counseling Services 


Co-Curricular Activities 

Instructional Administration 


Other Intergovernmental Charges 

Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 

Debt Services 


Pupil Transportation 


Curriculum & Staff Development 

Instructional Resources & Media Services 

Security & Monitoring Services 


Attendance & Social Work Services 



September 

2012 132

Revenue and Expenditure Assumptions 

For the General Fund 

The district employs a number of revenue forecasting methods. State aid and local property taxes are 

integrally joined to the biennial state budget process. The taxable property value for the FY2013 

Adopted Budget is projected to increase approximately 3.93 percent as compared to the FY2012 

net taxable value. Annual enrollment has historically grown by approximately 1 percent over the past 

six years. 

Revenue Assumptions 

Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) superseded House Bill 3646 (HB 3646) for the purpose of calculating state 

aid beginning in FY2012. Target revenue was reduced under SB 1, and WADA will be calculated 

at a lower amount than what was provided under HB 3646. 

Taxable Property – Certified property values are projected to increase 3.93 percent from FY2012 

to FY2013 using the preliminary values released in July 2012. 

Tax Collection Rate – Collection rate of 99 percent is used to determine the FY2013 local tax 

levy. 

Tax Rate – The tax rate for M&O will be maintained at $1.079 and the tax rate for I&S will be 

maintained at $0.163 per hundred dollars of assessed value. 

In FY2012, the revenue per WADA used to calculate the district’s entitlement funding was 

significantly reduced to a rate of $6,101 per WADA and will further decrease to $5,633 in FY2013, 

to effectively reduce the entitlement by additional $20 million in the second year of the biennium. 

Local Option – Due to minimal financial impact to the district, the budget projection maintains the 

local over 65 exemption of $25,000, in addition to the state required exemption of $10,000. 

Disabled Exemption – Due to minimal financial impact to the district, the budget projection 

maintains the local disabled exemption of $15,000, in addition to the state required $10,000. 

Historical Designated Property Exemption - Amends the AISD historic property tax exemption 

program with recent program modifications approved by the Austin City Council to effectively cap 

the historic exemption at $3,500 for properties that are designated or change owners after 

December 31, 2011. 

Expenditure Assumptions 

Alignment with Strategic Plan and FY2013 Board approved Goals and Priorities. 

Implement major budget reductions for the FY2012 and FY2013 biennium as a result of the 

state’s $4 billion funding reduction in the 2011 Texas Legislature. 

Campus non-staff allocations per student: $71 for high schools, $64 for middle/junior high and 

$59 for elementary schools. 

Staff campus instructional programs commensurate with enrollment projections. 

Assume an enrollment increase of 612 students from FY2012 to FY2013. 

The one year $13.8 million Education Jobs federal grant distributed through the TEA will be 

discontinued for the FY2013 school year. 

Increase budget for the costs associated with opening Uphaus Early Childhood Center in August 

2012, and other initiatives to support the Mission Critical Strategic Plan. 


September 

2012 133

Purpose of General Fund 

The General Fund is used to account for all financial 

resources except those required to be accounted for 

in another fund. 

Revenue 

Total revenue is estimated to decrease $29.9 million 

from the prior year adopted budget. 

Local Revenue 

Local revenue accounts for $677.4 million or 83.8 

percent of all available sources of funding for the 

FY2013 General Fund Budget. Of this amount, the 

largest source of revenue is $671.6 million in local 

property tax, which is derived from the current and 

delinquent property tax payments. 

The adopted budget shows a 6.1 percent increase in 

total local sources as compared to the prior year 

adopted budget. This increase is attributed to higher 

certified property valuations, increased rent 

revenues, and other miscellaneous revenue. 

State Revenue 

State revenue accounts for $110.3 million or 13.6 

percent of the total revenues of the General Fund 

Budget. State Revenue is projected to decrease 

more than $60 million when compared to the prior 

year budget. Unfortunately, reductions are expected 

to continue even beyond the biennium. The 82nd 

Legislature has expressed the intent to eliminate the 

additional state aid for Tax Reduction by 2018. Such 

a reduction could cost Austin ISD $150 million if fully 

enacted. 

Federal Revenue 

Federal sources account for $20.4 million or 

2.5 percent of the total revenue of the 

General Fund Budget. The School Health 

and Related Services program represents 

$18 million of total general fund federal 

funding. AISD received $13.8 million from 

the federal Edujobs grant in FY2012. This 

was a one-time general fund infusion and 

will expire for the FY2013 school year. 

Federal revenue is estimated to decrease 

by $8.7 million or 29.9 percent from the 

prior year adopted budget. 

Expenditures 

Expenditures decreased approximately $2.5 

million. Of this amount, payroll costs 

increased $10.6 million, Chapter 41 

payments decreased $23.4 million, supplies 

and materials increased $3.4 million, other 

operating expenditures increased $1.2 

million, professional and contracted 

services increased $6 million (net of the 

$23.4 million Chapter 41 increase) and debt 

service decreased $169,338. 

During the budget development process, 

the district has made significant budget 

reductions based on the decreased revenue 

projections from both state and federal 

sources. Unfortunately, the district will be 

forced to continue reducing expenditures 

due to the bleak revenue forecasts for 

future budgets. 

Fund Balance 

There will be a budget shortage of revenues 

over expenditures in an amount of almost 

$28 million. The deficit will be funded by the 

General Fund unassigned fund balance. 


September 

2012 134

Table 60 


General Fund Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Function 


Variance with 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 


Adopted 

Prior Year 

Budget Positive 

(Negative) 

% Variance with 

Prior Year 

Adopted 

Revenues 

Local Sources $ 664,832,840 $ 653,112,865 $ 638,484,837 $ 677,368,777 $ 38,883,940 

6.09% 

State Sources 126,019,476 162,678,023 170,302,248 110,259,107 (60,043,141) -35.26% 

Federal Sources 38,219,854 42,432,291 29,085,672 20,386,584 (8,699,088) -29.9% 

Total Revenues 829,072,170 858,223,179 837,872,757 808,014,468 (29,858,289) -3.56% 


Current 

Instruction $ 397,551,020 $ 399,301,376 $ 419,734,596 $ 432,107,452 $ 12,372,856 

2.95% 

Instructional Resources & Media Services 12,652,232 12,248,753 11,321,673 10,785,702 (535,971) -4.73% 

Curriculum & Staff Development 16,995,999 14,310,972 16,259,504 16,394,100 134,596 0.83% 

Instructional Administration 10,800,228 9,673,934 9,795,691 10,194,410 398,719 4.07% 

School Administration 46,634,597 46,971,582 46,812,796 47,911,053 1,098,257 2.35% 

Guidance & Counseling Services 19,054,858 19,417,443 18,726,353 19,694,749 968,396 5.17% 

Attendance & Social Work Services 2,893,886 3,040,796 2,970,687 2,906,651 (64,036) -2.16% 

Health Services 5,132,193 5,744,568 5,946,564 6,131,553 184,989 3.11% 

Pupil Transportation 25,474,229 26,441,452 24,488,580 27,109,548 2,620,968 10.70% 

Co-Curricular Activities 14,604,097 14,532,159 13,262,821 13,376,167 113,346 0.85% 

General Administration 17,124,548 16,532,883 17,064,813 18,248,506 1,183,693 6.94% 

Plant Maintenance 80,180,361 77,751,820 77,374,097 79,012,294 1,638,197 2.12% 

Security & Monitoring Services 9,466,965 9,028,580 9,577,526 9,897,984 320,458 3.35% 

Data Processing Services 17,841,016 18,498,506 17,244,095 17,803,638 559,543 3.24% 

Community Services 5,605,139 5,389,892 4,426,066 4,627,381 201,315 4.55% 

Debt Services 1,129,300 1,129,400 1,046,903 877,565 (169,338) -16.18% 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction 2,528,017 2,101,455 1,320,000 1,320,000 - 0.00% 

Contracted Instructional Srvc.-Public Schools 111,937,679 123,774,675 135,176,524 111,739,859 (23,436,665) -17.34% 

Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 1,700,441 1,658,106 1,233,902 1,658,106 424,204 34.38% 

Other Intergovernmental Charges 3,953,241 4,150,819 4,717,540 4,164,661 (552,879) -11.7% 


Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over 

Expenditures 

25,812,124 46,524,008 (627,974) (27,946,911) (27,318,937) 4350.33% 


Other Resources 196,725 80,025 51,000 51,000 - 0.00% 

Other Uses (109,050) (73,387) (81,000) (81,000) - 0.0% 

Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 87,675 6,638 (30,000) (30,000) - 0.0% 

Net Change in Fund Balances 25,899,799 46,530,646 (657,974) (27,976,911) (27,318,937) 4151.98% 


unspent balances at year end 30,064,925 

Fund Balances- September 1 (Beginning) 146,235,297 172,135,096 218,665,742 248,072,693 29,406,951 13.4% 

Fund Balances - August 31 (Ending) 172,135,096 218,665,742 248,072,693 220,095,782 (27,976,911) -11.3% 

Less Assigned Fund Balance (23,808,573) (39,038,247) (48,983,942) (35,530,274) 13,453,668 -27.5% 

Ending Fund Balance - Unassigned $ 148,326,523 $ 179,627,495 $ 199,088,751 $ 184,565,508 $ (14,523,243) -7.3% 


18% 22% 24% 22% 


September 

2012 135

A Comparison of the FY2012 Adopted Budget to the F2013 Adopted Budget 

General Fund expenditures will decrease $2.5 million or approximately 0.3 percent from the FY2012 

Adopted Budget. The net increase results from a $14.2 million increase for a nonrecurring employee 

payment allotment to provide the equivalent of a 3 percent increase, a $3 million increase for Annual ts, 

and $12.9 million in other budget reductions. 

General Fund revenue is expected to decrease by $29.9 million from the FY2012 Adopted Budget. The 

net decrease results from an increase of approximately $38.9 million in local revenue sources, a 

decrease of $60 million in state sources and a decrease of $8.7 million in federal sources. The decrease 

in state and federal revenue is somewhat offset by an increased Certified Local Property Tax Valuation. 

Operating Budget 

When the Chapter 41 payments are excluded from revenue, AISD will retain $696.3 million in operating 

revenue to support district functions for FY2013, as compared to the FY2012 Adopted Budget operating 

revenue of $702.7 million. The decrease in the Chapter 41 expenditure helps offset the large decrease in 

state aid. This represents a decrease of 0.91 percent or $6.4 million in operating revenue for the district in 



September 

2012 136

Table 61 


General Fund Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Function and Object 


FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

% Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 


Taxes- Current Year Levy $ 625,859,498 $ 652,782,885 $ 637,062,884 $ 627,260,426 $ 663,763,869 $ 36,503,443 5.82% 

Taxes- Prior Years 3,109,391 3,339,283 4,308,521 3,200,000 4,436,915 1,236,915 38.65% 

Penalty & Interest 3,108,693 3,335,172 3,296,161 3,100,000 3,394,387 294,387 9.50% 

Tuition & Fees 800,677 658,611 692,699 700,000 1,570,955 870,955 124.42% 

Athletic Activities 634,287 678,995 729,294 640,900 743,880 102,980 16.07% 

Earnings from Investments 3,039,348 554,266 393,716 600,000 401,630 (198,370) -33.06% 

Gifts and Bequests 197,958 64,049 25,230 141,066 - (141,066) -100.00% 

Insurance Recovery 1,255,394 16,333 2,333,537 100,000 - (100,000) 0.00% 

Erate Reimbursement 379,544 - - - - - 0.00% 

Rent Revenues 784,573 938,128 1,157,557 1,014,768 1,014,768 - 0.00% 

Other Revenues -Local Sources 1,810,702 2,465,118 3,113,266 1,727,677 2,042,373 314,696 18.21% 

TOTAL 640,980,065 664,832,840 653,112,865 638,484,837 677,368,777 38,883,940 6.09% 


Per Capita Apportionment 19,252,679 9,075,326 25,432,653 19,081,728 47,073,537 27,991,809 146.69% 

Foundation School Program 167,662,657 89,130,638 109,384,215 121,088,928 33,053,978 (88,034,950) -72.70% 

Prior Year State Rev Adjustments 201,806 - - - - - 0.00% 

State Indirect Costs 45,829 229,746 242,268 - - - 0.00% 

Other State Revenue 76,396 161,867 169,947 100,000 100,000 - 0.00% 

TRS on Behalf (Book Entry Only) 28,913,863 27,421,899 27,448,940 30,031,592 30,031,592 - 0.00% 

TOTAL 216,153,230 126,019,476 162,678,023 170,302,248 110,259,107 (60,043,141) -35.26% 


Federal Indirect Costs 1,701,124 2,224,404 2,310,644 1,600,000 2,163,595 563,595 35.22% 

State Stabilization Funds - 22,187,440 24,280,941 - - - 0.00% 

Federal Revenue Through TEA 242,235 256,426 244,110 13,985,672 199,000 (13,786,672) -98.58% 

School Health & Related Services 1,300,610 13,551,584 15,596,596 13,500,000 18,023,989 4,523,989 33.51% 

TOTAL 3,243,969 38,219,854 42,432,291 29,085,672 20,386,584 (8,699,088) -29.91% 

GENERAL FUND REVENUE TOTAL $ 860,377,264 $ 829,072,170 $ 858,223,179 $ 837,872,757 $ 808,014,468 $ (29,858,289) -3.70% 

EXPENDITURES 


Payroll Costs $ 374,167,504 $ 385,805,020 $ 386,873,807 $ 407,741,402 $ 412,159,712 $ 4,418,310 1.08% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 3,020,317 $ 2,875,416 $ 3,071,985 $ 3,014,320 $ 8,593,458 $ 5,579,138 185.09% 

Supplies & Materials $ 8,303,621 $ 7,699,780 $ 8,061,160 $ 8,240,693 $ 10,397,545 $ 2,156,852 26.17% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 1,315,981 $ 1,035,330 $ 920,431 $ 738,181 $ 956,737 $ 218,556 29.61% 

Capital Outlay $ 213,294 $ 135,474 $ 373,993 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 387,020,717 $ 397,551,020 $ 399,301,376 $ 419,734,596 $ 432,107,452 $ 12,372,856 2.95% 

12 Instructional Resource & Media 

Payroll Costs $ 10,919,363 $ 11,106,268 $ 10,664,810 $ 9,942,010 $ 9,421,612 $ (520,398) -5.23% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 181,602 $ 250,866 $ 205,514 $ 226,638 $ 229,166 $ 2,528 1.12% 

Supplies & Materials $ 3,274,943 $ 1,252,667 $ 1,264,160 $ 1,073,832 $ 1,054,537 $ (19,295) -1.80% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 89,952 $ 36,406 $ 20,530 $ 32,193 $ 33,387 $ 1,194 3.71% 

Capital Outlay $ 108,627 $ 6,025 $ 93,739 $ 47,000 $ 47,000 $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 14,574,487 $ 12,652,232 $ 12,248,753 $ 11,321,673 $ 10,785,702 $ (535,971) -4.73% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 

Payroll Costs $ 11,297,458 $ 13,727,720 $ 12,134,669 $ 14,358,628 $ 14,284,725 $ (73,903) -0.51% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 1,176,021 $ 1,339,679 $ 600,834 $ 668,139 $ 648,310 $ (19,829) -2.97% 

Supplies & Materials $ 748,757 $ 887,611 $ 663,275 $ 791,473 $ 876,258 $ 84,785 10.71% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 1,465,275 $ 1,040,989 $ 912,194 $ 441,264 $ 584,807 $ 143,543 32.53% 

Capital Outlay $ 5,130 $- $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 14,692,641 $ 16,995,999 $ 14,310,972 $ 16,259,504 $ 16,394,100 $ 134,596 0.83% 


September 

2012 137





FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

% Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

21 Instructional Administration 

Payroll Costs $ 8,906,728 $ 8,941,999 $ 8,105,239 $ 7,507,017 $ 7,882,898 $ 375,881 5.01% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 1,081,081 $ 1,058,876 $ 969,224 $ 1,318,573 $ 1,321,525 $ 2,952 0.22% 



Capital Outlay $ 16,769 $ 19,800 $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 11,041,576 $ 10,800,228 $ 9,673,934 $ 9,795,691 $ 10,194,410 $ 398,719 4.07% 

23 School Administration 

Payroll Costs $ 44,727,831 $ 45,941,750 $ 46,292,717 $ 46,379,903 $ 47,479,076 $ 1,099,173 2.37% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 131,659 $ 160,446 $ 181,774 $ 148,176 $ 127,035 $ (21,141) -14.27% 



TOTAL $ 45,466,644 $ 46,634,597 $ 46,971,582 $ 46,812,796 $ 47,911,053 $ 1,098,257 2.35% 

31 Guidance and Counseling 

Payroll Costs $ 16,965,762 $ 17,816,842 $ 18,298,872 $ 17,415,427 $ 18,121,447 $ 706,020 4.05% 




Capital Outlay $ - $- $ 6,676 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 18,421,332 $ 19,054,858 $ 19,417,443 $ 18,726,353 $ 19,694,749 $ 968,396 5.17% 

32 Social Services 

Payroll Costs $ 2,543,099 $ 2,661,990 $ 2,982,912 $ 2,638,146 $ 2,573,625 $ (64,521) -2.45% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 140,250 $ 210,998 $ 34,103 $ 303,792 $ 303,792 $ - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials $ 25,786 $ 15,381 $ 10,965 $ 18,687 $ 19,172 $ 485 2.60% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 30,498 $ 5,517 $ 12,816 $ 10,062 $ 10,062 $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 2,739,633 $ 2,893,886 $ 3,040,796 $ 2,970,687 $ 2,906,651 $ (64,036) -2.16% 

33 Health Services 

Payroll Costs $ 526,125 $ 530,352 $ 554,950 $ 537,452 $ 550,391 $ 12,939 2.41% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 4,825,064 $ 4,586,578 $ 5,149,995 $ 5,367,312 $ 5,539,412 $ 172,100 3.21% 

Supplies & Materials $ 17,671 $ 12,553 $ 37,894 $ 41,800 $ 41,750 $ (50) -0.12% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 3,677 $ 2,710 $ 1,729 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 5,372,537 $ 5,132,193 $ 5,744,568 $ 5,946,564 $ 6,131,553 $ 184,989 3.11% 

34 Student Transportation 

Payroll Costs $ 22,836,996 $ 23,495,865 $ 23,595,642 $ 21,951,643 $ 23,664,728 $ 1,713,085 7.80% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 1,132,216 $ 249,953 $ 211,715 $ 206,500 $ 209,500 $ 3,000 1.45% 

Supplies & Materials $ 2,432,793 $ 2,701,825 $ 3,535,235 $ 3,178,417 $ 4,117,600 $ 939,183 29.55% 

Other Operating Expenses $ (835,744) $ (973,414) $ (1,008,190) $ (847,980) $ (882,280) $ (34,300) 4.04% 

Capital Outlay $ 8,995 $ - $ 107,050 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 25,575,256 $ 25,474,229 $ 26,441,452 $ 24,488,580 $ 27,109,548 $ 2,620,968 10.70% 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 

Payroll Costs $ 9,931,624 $ 10,825,419 $ 10,786,996 $ 10,281,910 $ 10,355,084 $ 73,174 0.71% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 1,029,038 $ 1,136,495 $ 1,124,819 $ 920,262 $ 1,074,350 $ 154,088 16.74% 

Supplies & Materials $ 1,090,240 $ 1,109,453 $ 1,062,674 $ 971,686 $ 872,475 $ (99,211) -10.21% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 1,394,785 $ 1,403,577 $ 1,519,669 $ 1,088,963 $ 1,074,258 $ (14,705) -1.35% 

Capital Outlay $ 210,608 $ 129,153 $ 38,001 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 13,656,295 $ 14,604,097 $ 14,532,159 $ 13,262,821 $ 13,376,167 $ 113,346 0.85% 


September 

2012 138





FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

% Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

41 General Administration 

Payroll Costs $ 14,029,715 $ 13,403,330 $ 13,572,186 $ 13,975,151 $ 14,463,666 $ 488,515 3.50% 



Other Operating Expenses $ 1,059,930 $ 861,772 $ 409,400 $ 879,925 $ 1,269,557 $ 389,632 44.28% 

Capital Outlay $- $ - $ 6,240 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 18,325,386 $ 17,124,548 $ 16,532,883 $ 17,064,813 $ 18,248,506 $ 1,183,693 6.94% 

51 Plant Maintenance & Operations 

Payroll Costs $ 42,625,397 $ 40,900,240 $ 39,670,791 $ 40,403,067 $ 41,711,543 $ 1,308,476 3.24% 


Supplies & Materials $ 4,554,787 $ 4,609,972 $ 4,352,458 $ 3,742,156 $ 3,828,804 $ 86,648 2.32% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 1,739,835 $ 2,233,347 $ 1,639,474 $ 1,729,553 $ 1,707,055 $ (22,498) -1.30% 


TOTAL $ 81,774,183 $ 80,180,361 $ 77,751,820 $ 77,374,097 $ 79,012,294 $ 1,638,197 2.12% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 

Payroll Costs $ 8,573,494 $ 8,863,239 $ 8,417,648 $ 9,029,501 $ 9,348,958 $ 319,457 3.54% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 78,276 $ 65,255 $ 70,225 $ 87,858 $ 88,358 $ 500 0.57% 


Other Operating Expenses $ 110,415 $ 71,607 $ 84,900 $ 50,325 $ 50,326 $ 1 0.00% 


TOTAL $ 9,615,306 $ 9,466,965 $ 9,028,580 $ 9,577,526 $ 9,897,984 $ 320,458 3.35% 

53 Data Processing Services 

Payroll Costs $ 10,739,629 $ 10,837,656 $ 10,431,465 $ 11,078,514 $ 11,638,057 $ 559,543 5.05% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 3,623,466 $ 3,082,208 $ 2,848,894 $ 2,859,366 $ 2,859,366 $ - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials $ 4,108,525 $ 3,580,927 $ 4,809,026 $ 3,255,056 $ 3,255,056 $ - 0.00% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 172,542 $ 80,618 $ 56,037 $ 26,159 $ 26,159 $ - 0.00% 


TOTAL $ 18,816,394 $ 17,841,016 $ 18,498,506 $ 17,244,095 $ 17,803,638 $ 559,543 3.24% 

61 Community Services 

Payroll Costs $ 4,876,332 $ 4,704,715 $ 4,512,651 $ 3,447,906 $ 3,610,771 $ 162,865 4.72% 




TOTAL $ 5,886,757 $ 5,605,139 $ 5,389,892 $ 4,426,066 $ 4,627,381 $ 201,315 4.55% 


Debt Service $ 1,122,270 $ 1,129,300 $ 1,129,400 $ 1,046,903 $ 877,565 $ (169,338) -16.18% 

TOTAL $ 1,122,270 $ 1,129,300 $ 1,129,400 $ 1,046,903 $ 877,565 $ (169,338) -16.18% 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 

Payroll Costs $ - $ - $ 3,512 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 579,618 $ 610,402 $ 604,300 $ 1,320,000 $ 1,320,000 $ - 0.00% 

Supplies & Materials $ 26,768 $ 26,501 $ 26,501 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

Other Operating Expenses $ 31,388 $ 22,989 $ 9,419 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

Capital Outlay $ 4,576,987 $ 1,868,125 $ 1,457,723 $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 5,214,761 $ 2,528,017 $ 2,101,455 $ 1,320,000 $ 1,320,000 $ - 0.00% 


September 

2012 139





FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

% Increase 

(Decrease) 

Over Prior 

Year 

91 Contracted Srvcs Between Public Schools 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 177,664,513 $ 111,937,679 $ 123,774,675 $ 135,176,524 $ 111,739,859 $ (23,436,665) -17.34% 

TOTAL $ 177,664,513 $ 111,937,679 $ 123,774,675 $ 135,176,524 $ 111,739,859 $ (23,436,665) -17.34% 

93 Payments For Shared Svcs 

Other Operating Expenses $ 1,244,061 $ 1,700,441 $ 1,658,106 $ 1,233,902 $ 1,658,106 $ 424,204 25.58% 

TOTAL $ 1,244,061 $ 1,700,441 $ 1,658,106 $ 1,233,902 $ 1,658,106 $ 424,204 25.58% 


Professional & Contracted Srvcs. $ 3,843,994 $ 3,953,241 $ 4,150,819 $ 4,717,540 $ 4,164,661 $ (552,879) -11.72% 

TOTAL $ 3,843,994 $ 3,953,241 $ 4,150,819 $ 4,717,540 $ 4,164,661 $ (552,879) -11.72% 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 862,068,744 $ 803,260,046 $ 811,699,171 $ 838,500,731 $ 835,961,379 $ (2,539,352) -0.30% 

OTHER SOURCES $ 

- 

Loan Proceeds $ 64,129 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

Operating Transfer In $ 1,394,910 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

Sale of Real Property $ - $ 196,725 $ 80,025 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 1,459,039 $ 196,725 $ 80,025 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ - 0.00% 

OTHER USES 

Legal Settlement $ 217,284 $ 109,050 $ 73,387 $ 81,000 $ 81,000 $ - 0.00% 

Operating Transfer Out $ 5,054,461 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.00% 

TOTAL $ 5,271,745 $ 109,050 $ 73,387 $ 81,000 $ 81,000 $ - 0.00% 

NET SOURCES OVER (UNDER) $ (3,812,706) $ 87,675 $ 6,638 $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ - 0.00% 

NET REVENUE/SOURCES OVER (UNDER) 

$ (5,504,185) $ 25,899,799 $ 46,530,646 $ (657,974) $ (27,976,911) $ (27,318,937) 4151.98% 

ESTIMATED OUTSTANDING PURCHASE 

ORDERS AND UNSPENT BALANCES AT 

YEAR END 

$ 

30,064,925 

FUNDING BALANCES-SEPT 1 (BEGINNING) $ 151,739,483 $ 146,235,297 $ 172,135,096 $ 218,665,742 $ 248,072,693 $ 29,406,951 13.45% 

FUNDING BALANCES-AUG 31 (ENDING) $ 146,235,297 $ 172,135,096 $ 218,665,742 $ 248,072,693 $ 220,095,782 $ (27,976,911) -11.28% 

LESS ASSIGNED BALANCE $ (25,279,819) $ (23,808,573) $ (39,038,247) $ (48,983,942) $ (35,530,274) $ 13,453,668 -27.47% 

ENDING FUND BALANCE - UNASSIGNED $ 120,955,478 $ 148,326,523 $ 179,627,495 $ 199,088,751 $ 184,565,508 $ (14,523,243) -7.29% 



14% 18% 22% 24% 22% 


September 

2012 140

Table 62 


FY2013 Adopted Budget Comparison With and Without Chapter 41 



Adopted Budget 

Adopted Budget 

With Chapter 41 Without Chapter 41 

Salaries $ 627,266,293 75.0% $ 627,266,293 86.6% 

Chapter 41 Payments 111,739,859 13.4% - 0.0% 

Contracted Services 61,742,252 7.4% 61,742,252 8.5% 

Supplies & Materials 27,448,276 3.3% 27,448,276 3.8% 

Other Operating Expenses 6,749,899 0.8% 6,749,899 0.9% 

Debt Service 877,565 0.1% 877,565 0.1% 

Capital Outlay 137,235 0.0% 137,235 0.0% 

Other Uses 81,000 0.0% 81,000 0.0% 

Total $ 836,042,379 100% $ 724,302,520 100% 

Table 63 


FY2013 Adopted Budget Comparison With and Without Chapter 41 by Percent 

FY2013 General Fund including Chapter 41 

Salaries 

75.04% 

Capital Outlay 

0.02% 

Debt Service 

0.10% 

Supplies & 

Other 

Materials 

Operating 

3.28% 

Expenses 

0.81% 

Chapter 41 

Payments 

13.37% 

Contracted 

Services 7.39% 

FY2013 General Fund excluding Chapter 41 

Salaries 

86.61% 

Capital 

Outlay 

0.02% 

Debt Service 

0.12% Supplies & 

Materials 

Other Operating 3.79% 

Expenses 

0.93% 

Contracted 

Services 

8.53% 


September 

2012 141

Table 64 




Revenue 

1 Decrease in State Aid $ (60,043,141) 

2 Decrease in Education Jobs funding $ (13,798,672) 

3 Increase in tax levy, current and prior years $ 

37,689,358 

4 Increase in the School Health Reimbursement Program (SHARS) $ 

4,523,989 

5 Increase in Tuition and Fees $ 

870,955 

6 Increase in Federal Indirect Costs $ 

563,595 

7 Other $ 

284,627 

Net Change in Revenues $ (29,909,289) 

Expenditures 

A Employee Payments 

One-time 3% compensation adjustment for all regular employees $ 

14,160,000 

B New Delivery Models/Implementing the Annual Academic and Facilities 

Recommendations (AAFRs) 

1 North Central elementary schools overcrowding $ 

1,444,371 

2 Dual Language Immersion Programs to four additional schools $ 

191,192 

3 In-District Charter: Graduation Pathways Education Program $ 

1,023,512 

4 In-District Charter: IDEA Allan College Preparation $ 

323,445 

Sub-Total $ 

2,982,520 

C Additions For Continuing Strategic Plan Initiatives 

5 Provide early Pre-K registration so that students are enrolled and have access to 

free/reduced lunch on the first day of school. Pre-K testing materials. $ 

151,000 

6 Addition AIMS web licenses to include grades 3 through 9 $ 

246,063 

7 Continue funding the Twilight Program at its north and south campus. The program has 

been successful in reclaiming dropouts and providing an evening school option for 

students to reclaim/accelerate course credits and meet graduation requirements. To 

date, participating students have reclaimed 808 credits, and 177 students have 

graduated. $ 

780,045 

8 Continue supporting the Schoolnet Instructional Management System after the grant 

expires. $ 

71,404 

9 Continue supporting external service providers and their grantors so that they can 

monitor the outcomes of students that are served by their programs, maintaining 

National Student Clearinghouse data for post secondary enrollment, and the Substance 

Use and Safety Survey once grants expire. $ 

53,450 

10 Expand the existing ACE program for 35 tutors to 80 tutors who will serve students at a 

third of AISD's elementary campuses. ACE tutors provide small group and whole class 

research and early literacy intervention. $ 

300,000 

11 Bus monitors for Uphaus ECC bus transportation $ 

243,000 

12 Continue supporting multicultural outreach initiatives through contracted programming 

such as radio shows, parental engagement, support for multiple languages in addition to 

Spanish, and support educational fairs. $ 

159,000 

13 Anderson Vertical Team to implement "One World Schools," based on the tenants of the 

International Baccalaureate Organization. $ 

288,658 

Sub-Total $ 

2,292,620 


September 

2012 142





D New Strategic Plan Investments 

14 Implement a dual-phase dyslexia program that includes a dyslexia specialist, multi 

sensory reading program materials, and training. $ 

128,000 

15 Increase the number of K-2 students reading at or above grade level with the addition of 

10 Primary Literacy Campus Specialists. $ 

849,490 

16 Provide clerical support for the Social and Emotional Learning Program $ 

25,000 

17 Create a substitute hiring pool for custodians to keep up with school level housekeeping 

needs. $ 

130,504 

18 Allot funding for the Texas Virtual School Network (TxVSN), which allows students to take 

online courses for high school credit. $ 

70,000 

19 Additional A/C mechanics and plumbers to reduce the work order backlog and reduce 

overtime pay. $ 

284,663 

Sub-total $ 

1,487,657 

E Statutorily Required or Contractually Obligated 

20 Plan for projected increase in special education student enrollment and PPCD 

increases. In FY2012, there was an increase of 497 students in special education and 

a 25% increase in students requiring PPCD services. $ 

1,618,954 

21 Conduct summer retesting for an additional grade as required under new state 

$ 

110,000 

assessment requirements for end-of-course test takers. 

22 Provide transportation services for students retaking end-of-course assessments and $ 

150,000 

STAAR exit-level in July 2013. 

23 Provide transportation services for three additional student days of instruction (district 

calendar change) $ 

180,000 

24 Fund increased annual fees imposed by the Greater Austin/Travis Regional Radio 

System for radio communications used by bus transportation, police, school 

administrators, emergency management and maintenance. $ 

20,000 

25 Pay the increasing cost of high school graduations, including the first class of seniors at 

the Ann Richards school, and summer school graduates. $ 

36,282 

26 Fund increased enrollment and participation in the Early College High School Program 

at LBJ & Reagan high schools. Up to 1,800 students could enroll to earn dual credit 

from Austin Community College. $ 

320,000 

Sub-Total $ 

2,435,236 

F Revenue Generating or Cost Avoidance 

27 Hire a district-wide Sustainability Coordinator to analyze energy use and implement 

measures to reduce utility usage and increase energy efficiency and environmental 

sustainability, which will reduce operating expenditures in the long term. $ 

69,052 

28 Tuition based Pre-K program $ 

70,955 

29 IDEA Allan Buy Back Services (offset by revenue to be collected from IDEA) $ 

256,781 

30 Hire an additional grant writer to support the submission of an additional $10 million in 

grant proposal submission for the district. $ 

80,000 

31 Hire an additional FTE to provide additional assessment data and evaluation planning for 

the grant development process $ 

92,000 

32 Implementation of a district-wide Health and Wellness initiative to contain future 

healthcare costs 

Cost Neutral 

Sub-Total $ 

568,788 


September 

2012 143





G Baseline Increases 

33 New school operating impact costs (Uphaus ECC) $ 

1,088,283 

34 Wastewater $ 

468,684 

35 Enrollment growth $ 

4,044,934 

36 Health insurance increase $ 

3,372,438 

37 Gasoline and fuels for student transportation $ 

894,483 

Sub-Total $ 

9,868,822 

Total Additions $ 

33,795,643 

H Reductions In Budget 

38 Decrease in Chapter 41 estimate $ (23,436,665) 

39 Other budget reductions to achieve savings $ (12,898,329) 

Total Reductions $ (36,334,994) 

Net Change in the Expenditure Budget $ 

(2,539,352) 


September 

2012 144

General Fund - Future Expenditure Considerations 

Option to Stabilize Revenue through a Tax Increase 

To stabilize district revenue and sustain a long-term salary increase, the district would need to increase 

its tax rate by 6 cents for the maintenance and operations (M&O) budget. In this way, the district could 

increase its revenue to support proposed budget increases and protect its reserve levels to mitigate 

potential future cuts in state funding. 

Under state law, school districts must get voter approval for any increase in M&O tax rates. The AISD 

Board of Trustees would need to call for a Tax Ratification Election (TRE) in June 2013 or November 

2013 in order to fund a compensation increase. Texas school districts are the only local taxing authorities 

that are required to get voter approval in order to increase taxes. This has been the case since 2006, the 

last time the state Legislature passed school finance legislation. Other local entities, including the city and 

the county, are not required to seek voter approval for limited tax increases. If the voters approved, this 

would be the first increase to the M&O tax rate sought by the district since FY2009 when voters ratified an 

increase of nearly four cents by increasing the tax rate from 1.04, which is the maximum tax rate the 

district can establish without voter approval, to 1.079. Increasing the tax rate from 1.079/$100 to 

1.139/$100 would generate an additional $20.9 million in net revenue for the district and increase the tax 

bill for the average homeowner by $154. Increasing the tax rate from 1.079/$100 to 1.170/$100 would 

generate an additional $31.7 million in net revenue for the district and increase the tax bill for the average 

homeowner by $230.The debt service tax rate (also known as I&S) would remain flat at 1.063/$100 of 

taxable value. 

While the FY2013 Adopted Budget does not assume a tax rate increase, the district would like to continue 

its dialogue with the Austin community about the possibility of considering a TRE in future years to secure 

the revenue needed to implement a permanent salary increase for employees and support key academic 

programming. The below scenarios are based on the certified values from TCAD. 

Table 65 


Tax Ratification Election (TRE) Projected Revenue Scenarios 

Local Revenue 

Generated 

Net Revenue 

Retained 

Estimated Average 

Taxpayer Impact 

Estimated Median 

Taxpayer Impact 

Scenario 

Tax Rate (Above Status Quo) (Above Status Quo) (Annual Increase) (Annual Increase) 

Status quo 1.0790 n/a n/a $7 ($20) 

Four-cent increase 1.1190 $23.6M $14.0M $106 $56 

Five-cent increase 1.1290 $29.4M $17.5M $130 $76 

Six-cent increase 1.1390 $35.3M $20.9M $154 $95 

Seven-cent increase 1.1490 $41.2M $24.4M $178 $114 

Eight-cent increase 1.1590 $47.1M $27.9M $203 $133 

Nine-cent increase 

(maximum) 1.1700 $53.6M $31.70 $230 $154 


September 

2012 145

Other Funding Considerations for a TRE 

There are a number of important Strategic Plan priorities that could be supported through a TRE. 

Pre-kindergarten/Early Childhood - In FY2012, AISD lost nearly $5 million in state grant funds to support 

full day pre-k. One-time Federal funds made up for these losses but they are due to expire in FY2013 so 

funds are needed to fully restore the program going forward. Additionally, resource support for early 

literacy before 3rd grade is critically important to strengthen student success. The district is budgeting 

$19.4 million to support a full day pre-kindergarten program in FY2013. 

Fine Arts - AISD is in partnership with the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, to establish a 

long range plan to deliver fine arts to AISD students. The first phase of the program begins with a 

comprehensive audit of existing arts education resources and a needs assessment by Kennedy Center 

staff to determine gaps. Based on this information, a plan is created that focuses on increasing arts 

education opportunities for K-8 students. Funding from a TRE could be used to address any gaps that are 

found. The district currently budgets approximately $15.4 million for fine arts programming. 

Athletics - Along with fine arts, critical investments are needed for athletics to support district needs in 

areas such as: ensuring equity in athletics programming across the district, replenishing team uniforms, 

providing access to field trips, obtaining quality protective gear and improving facilities and equipment. 

Unlike fine arts, a comprehensive assessment has not yet been initiated. However, the district’s Capital 

Improvement and Bond Planning Advisory Committee (CIBPAC) has indicated that investments are 

needed in both infrastructure and programming. The district currently budgets more than $10.7 million for 

athletics programming. 

Social Emotional Learning - AISD has partnered with the Collaborative for Academic, Social and 

Emotional Learning (CASEL) to strengthen Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) district-wide. SEL is the 

process whereby children develop essential social and emotional skills, knowledge and attitudes to 

ensure academic success and preparation for college, career and life. Funds could be used to accelerate 

the implementation of SEL in all schools to improve student emotional intelligence and behavior leading 

to important outcomes such as: reduced bullying, classroom disruption, aggression and interpersonal 

violence to create a safe and welcoming school environment and become a national model in the practice 

of SEL. The district currently budgets $651,000 for Social Emotional Learning of which, approximately 75 

percent is funded with grants and outside resources. 


September 

2012 146

General Fund Campus Information 

General Fund Expenditures per Pupil 

For FY2013, the budgeted operating expenditure per pupil was calculated by dividing the total 

expenditures with the enrollment number. 

Both the TEA and AISD operating expenditures exclude the following: 

Object 6500 Interest on Debt 

Object 6600 Capital Outlay 

Function 61: Community Services 

Function 81: Facilities Acquisition & Construction 

Function 91: Chapter 41 Payments 

Function 93: Payments - Shared Services Agreements 

Function 99: Intergovernmental Charges 

The expenditures per pupil do not represent all funding allocations for each campus. Only the General 

Fund Budget is included for this calculation purpose. 

The actual allocation to campuses includes special programs such as special education, Title I 

allocations, etc. The special program allocations vary significantly from campus to campus and from year 

to year. 

Expenditure variances on a per pupil basis should be expected. No two campuses have the identical 

makeup in pupil demographics, teacher experience levels or program offerings. 

Why do variances exist among campus per pupil expenditures? 

1. Additional programs at secondary campuses versus elementary campuses can cause a higher per 

pupil cost. 

2. Major shifts in pupil counts due to campus boundary changes and changes in enrollment, cause 

swings in per pupil costs from year to year. 

3. The average staff experience levels per campus correlate directly with salaries and benefits paid. 

The higher the average experience, the higher the salaries and benefits on a per pupil basis. 


September 

2012 147

Table 66 


Operating Expenditures per Student 

FY2010 through FY2013 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 

PEIMS 

Actual % 

PEIMS 

Actual % 

PEIMS 

Budget % 

Adopted 

Budget* % 

Enrollment (Actual/First Six Weeks) 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 

By Function 

11 Instruction $ 4,717 58.85% $ 4,678 59.34% $ 4,661 58.24% $ 4,948 60.73% 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Servcs. 150 1.87% 143 1.81% 130 1.62% 123 1.51% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 202 2.52% 168 2.13% 257 3.21% 188 2.30% 

1x - Instructional 5,069 63.24% 4,989 63.26% 5,049 63.08% 5,258 64.54% 

21 Instructional Administration 128 1.59% 113 1.44% 123 1.54% 117 1.43% 

23 School Administration 554 6.90% 551 6.99% 529 6.61% 549 6.73% 

2x - Instructional-Related 682 8.50% 664 8.43% 652 8.15% 665 8.17% 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 226 2.82% 228 2.89% 229 2.86% 226 2.77% 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 34 0.43% 36 0.45% 38 0.48% 33 0.41% 

33 Health Services 61 0.76% 67 0.85% 68 0.85% 70 0.86% 

34 Pupil Transportation 302 3.77% 308 3.91% 294 3.67% 310 3.81% 

35 Food Services - 0.00% - 0.00% - 0.00% - 0.00% 

36 Co-curricular Activities 172 2.15% 170 2.16% 154 1.92% 153 1.88% 

3x - Pupil Services 796 9.92% 808 10.26% 783 9.78% 793 9.73% 

41 General Administration 203 2.53% 194 2.46% 200 2.49% 209 2.56% 

4x - Administrative Support Services 203 2.53% 194 2.46% 200 2.49% 209 2.56% 

51 Plant Maintenance 946 11.80% 911 11.56% 974 12.16% 905 11.10% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 112 1.40% 105 1.34% 111 1.39% 113 1.39% 

53 Data Processing Services 209 2.60% 213 2.70% 236 2.95% 204 2.50% 

5x - Support Services 1,267 15.81% 1,229 15.59% 1,321 16.50% 1,222 15.00% 

TOTAL $ 8,017 100.00% $ 7,884 100.00% $ 8,004 100.00% $ 8,147 100.00% 

*PEIMS actual data was used to calculate FY2010 and FY2011, PEIMS budget data was used to calculate FY2012 and the AISD accounting platform 

was used to calculate FY2013 data 

The above operating expenditures excludes the following: 

Object 6500 Interest on Debt 

Object 6600 Capital Outlay 

Function 61: Community Services 

Function 81: Facilities Acquisition & Construction 

Function 91: Chapter 41 Payments 

Function 93: Payments - Shared Services Agreements 

Function 99: Intergovernmental Charges 


September 

2012 148


General Fund 

Campus 

Budgets


AISD High Schools 

Akins High School 

Anderson High School 

Ann Richards School for Young Women Leaders 

Austin High School 

Bowie High School 

Crockett High School 

Eastside Memorial High School 

IDEA Allan 6-12 (In-District Charter School) 

International High School 

Lanier High School 

LASA-Liberal Arts Science Academy 

LBJ Comprehensive High School 

McCallum High School 

Premier High School at Lanier (In-District Charter School) 

Premier High School at Travis (In-District Charter School) 

Reagan High School 

Travis High School 


September 

2012 149

10701 South 1 st Street . Austin, Texas 78748 . Daniel Girard, Principal 

Akins High School 

General Fund 


Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Budgeted 

Enrollment 2,588 2,650 2,655 2,733 2,696 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration 7.00 6.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 

Other Professionals 4.45 7.62 2.00 0.00 0.00 

Teachers 162.04 169.65 177.20 152.50 155.90 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff 10.93 11.83 9.94 9.00 9.00 

Educational Aides 22.87 25.00 27.00 24.00 23.00 

Total 207.29 220.10 224.14 193.50 195.90 


Audited Audited Audited Budgeted Budgeted 

Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 12,756,466 $ 13,895,659 $ 13,616,855 $ 13,237,625 $ 13,470,458 

Contracted Services (6200) 574,891 613,791 385,969 616,603 599,817 

Supplies & Materials (6300) 446,659 272,162 464,585 280,318 291,138 

Other Expenses (6400) 59,363 72,866 120,742 15,331 14,481 

Equipment (6600) - - 54,626 - - 

Total $ 13,837,378 $ 14,854,478 $ 14,642,777 $ 14,149,877 $ 14,375,894 

Per Student Cost $ 5,347 $ 5,605 $ 5,515 $ 5,177 $ 5,332 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

TAKS TAKS TAKS TAKS STAAR 

Assessment Results-Percent Met Standard 

Reading 81% 87% 87% 88% n/a 

Mathematics 58% 66% 72% 71% n/a 

Writing n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Social Studies 87% 91% 93% 93% n/a 

Science 63% 65% 75% 77% n/a 


September 

2012 150

8403 Mesa Drive . Austin, Texas 78759 . Donna Houser, Principal 

Anderson High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 2,084 1,984 2,089 2,045 2,048 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 124.85 124.15 124.52 112.60 117.75 

Support: 



Total 165.80 162.72 167.35 143.60 148.75 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 1,482 6,540 28,474 - - 

Total $ 11,398,535 $ 11,967,117 $ 10,678,660 $ 11,316,427 $ 11,797,804 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 95% 95% 94% 94% n/a 




Science 88% 92% 93% 90% n/a 


September 

2012 151

Ann Richards School for Young Women Leaders 

2206 Prather Lane. Austin, Texas 78704 . Jeanne Goka, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 332 437 526 618 715 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 25.65 33.10 38.33 37.00 43.00 

Support: 



Total 31.60 39.37 46.38 44.00 50.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 5,666 - - - - 

Total $ 2,768,420 $ 3,395,787 $ 3,712,649 $ 3,790,522 $ 3,848,979 

Per Student Cost n/a $ 7,771 $ 7,058 $ 6,134 $ 5,383 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 100% 100% 99% n/a 


Writing 98% 100% 100% >99% n/a 

Social Studies n/a 99% 100% >99% n/a 

Science n/a 89% 90% 98% n/a 


September 

2012 152

1715 W. Cesar Chavez . Austin, Texas 78703 . Sandy Compian, Principal 

Austin High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 2,290 2,350 2,287 2,252 2,199 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 135.67 141.89 149.70 126.70 121.20 

Support: 



Total 179.20 181.97 193.24 159.70 153.20 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 10,958 - 5,274 - - 

Total $ 12,178,665 $ 12,751,289 $ 12,055,632 $ 11,963,931 $ 12,192,786 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 88% 93% 93% 92% n/a 


Writing n/a n/a 0% n/a n/a 


Science 75% 79% 85% 88% n/a 


September 

2012 153

4103 Slaughter Lane . Austin, Texas 78749 . Stephen Kane, Principal 

Bowie High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 2,752 2,805 2,874 2,892 2,878 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 163.68 166.30 166.16 149.20 157.10 

Support: 



Total 202.15 205.88 205.16 182.20 188.10 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 7,559 14,316 35,598 - - 

Total $ 14,147,221 $ 14,708,404 $ 13,855,491 $ 14,258,979 $ 14,206,236 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 94% 96% 97% 98% n/a 




Science 87% 89% 94% 94% n/a 


September 

2012 154

5601 Manchaca Road . Austin, Texas 78743 . Craig Shapiro, Principal 

Crockett High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,809 1,732 1,642 1,561 1,557 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 127.11 126.67 122.02 101.00 96.50 

Support: 



Total 160.52 165.55 159.20 128.00 122.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 12,152 43,983 - - - 

Total $ 10,565,745 $ 11,007,351 $ 9,925,585 $ 10,246,822 $ 10,358,625 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 83% 85% 86% 85% n/a 




Science 65% 73% 82% 81% n/a 


September 

2012 155

1012 Arthur Stiles . Austin, Texas 78721 . Bryan Miller, Principal 

Eastside Memorial High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 531 n/a n/a 633 652 

Student/Teacher Ratio 10.91 n/a n/a 14.93 15.31 

Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration 4.00 n/a n/a 3.00 4.00 

Other Professionals 1.68 n/a n/a 0.00 0.00 

Teachers 48.68 n/a n/a 46.00 42.60 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff 9.00 n/a n/a 4.00 4.00 

Educational Aides 7.00 n/a n/a 9.00 8.00 

Total 70.36 0.00 0.00 62.00 58.60 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 5,388,842 n/a n/a $ 5,366,154 $ 3,486,794 

Contracted Services (6200) 416,999 n/a n/a 536,211 474,803 

Supplies & Materials (6300) 233,367 n/a n/a 137,252 132,386 

Other Expenses (6400) 123,207 n/a n/a 10,768 8,268 

Equipment (6600) 5,500 n/a n/a - - 

Total $ 6,167,914 $ - $ - $ 6,050,385 $ 4,102,251 

Per Student Cost $ 11,616 n/a n/a $ 9,558 $ 6,292 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading n/a 70% n/a n/a n/a 

Mathematics n/a 45% n/a n/a n/a 


Social Studies n/a 79% n/a n/a n/a 

Science n/a 41% n/a n/a n/a 

Note: For FY10 and FY11, Eastside Memorial split into two separate high schools. In FY12 the two schools 

regrouped back into one entity. Information for those two years can be found on the following page. 


September 

2012 156

Eastside Memorial Global Tech & Green Tech HS 

1012 Arthur Stiles . Austin, Texas 78721 

General Fund 

Eastside Memorial 

Global Tech HS 

Eastside Memorial 

Green Tech HS 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2010 FY2011 

Actual Actual Actual Actual 

Enrollment 202 260 443 405 

Student/Teacher Ratio 9.08 10.28 12.72 10.44 

Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.50 

Other Professionals 0.09 0.00 0.05 0.00 

Teachers 22.24 25.30 34.82 38.80 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff 2.00 2.00 7.19 5.90 

Educational Aides 0.00 0.90 6.00 9.00 

Total 27.32 31.20 51.07 57.20 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2010 FY2011 

Audited Audited Audited Audited 

Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 2,248,210 $ 2,302,880 $ 3,251,707 $ 3,087,197 

Contracted Services (6200) 230,147 20,681 587,241 325,401 

Supplies & Materials (6300) 157,926 62,371 226,837 74,337 

Other Expenses (6400) 36,015 70,320 45,966 17,619 

Equipment (6600) 508,511 34,588 - 152,002 

Total $ 3,180,810 $ 2,490,841 $ 4,111,751 $ 3,656,556 

Per Student Cost $ 15,747 $ 9,580 $ 9,282 $ 9,029 

FY2009 FY2010 FY2009 FY2010 

TAKS TAKS TAKS TAKS 


Reading n/a 82% n/a 74% 

Mathematics n/a 46% n/a 50% 

Writing n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Social Studies n/a 75% n/a 87% 

Science n/a 39% n/a 59% 


September 

2012 157

4900 Gonzales . Austin, Texas 78702 . In-District Charter School 

IDEA Allan 6-12 

General Fund 



Enrollment n/a n/a n/a n/a 225 

Student/Teacher Ratio n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Other Professionals n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Teachers n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Educational Aides n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 

- 

Contracted Services (6200) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,107,129 

Supplies & Materials (6300) n/a n/a n/a n/a - 

Other Expenses (6400) n/a n/a n/a n/a - 

Equipment (6600) n/a n/a n/a n/a - 

Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,107,129 

Per Student Cost n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 4,921 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Mathematics n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 


Social Studies n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Science n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 


September 

2012 158

1012 Arthur Stiles . Austin, Texas 78721 . Susan Galvan, Principal 

International High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 217 237 180 136 150 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 18.12 16.95 16.44 10.50 9.00 

Support: 



Total 24.12 22.95 22.04 15.50 13.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,524,797 $ 1,308,190 $ 1,285,389 $ 1,376,536 $ 1,310,128 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 159

1201 Peyton Gin Road . Austin, Texas 78758 . Katherine Ryan, Principal 

Lanier High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,525 1,433 1,510 1,671 1,668 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 111.42 110.19 114.50 90.50 97.75 

Support: 



Total 143.91 144.85 146.16 113.50 122.75 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 10,115,979 $ 9,931,778 $ 9,643,378 $ 10,004,741 $ 10,018,344 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 74% 79% 80% 82% n/a 




Science 55% 62% 69% 67% n/a 


September 

2012 160

7309 Lazy Creek Drive . Austin, Texas 78724 . Stacia Crescenzi, Principal 

LASA - Liberal Arts and Science Academy High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 858 870 878 942 927 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 57.44 57.35 57.05 49.55 53.85 

Support: 



Total 63.45 64.43 64.91 57.55 61.85 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - 8,043 - - 

Total $ 4,110,880 $ 4,345,020 $ 4,472,516 $ 4,226,530 $ 4,386,703 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 100% 99% >99% n/a 

Mathematics 99% 99% 100% >99% n/a 


Social Studies 100% 100% 100% >99% n/a 

Science 99% 98% 100% >99% n/a 


September 

2012 161

7309 Lazy Creek Drive . Austin, Texas 78724 . Sheila Henry, Principal 

LBJ Comprehensive High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 0 977 952 909 929 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 0.00 71.34 71.16 60.25 59.50 

Support: 



Total 0.00 97.31 97.45 79.25 76.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 7,090,981 $ 7,343,007 $ 7,028,907 $ 7,032,110 $ 6,967,063 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 73% 72% 78% 76% n/a 




Science 54% 39% 58% 74% n/a 


September 

2012 162

5600 Sunshine Drive . Austin, Texas 78756 . Michael Garrison, Principal 

McCallum High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,703 1,751 1,775 1,762 1,766 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 107.24 107.56 114.77 100.30 99.73 

Support: 



Total 134.91 137.46 142.16 122.30 122.73 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 5,666 7,559 18,874 - - 

Total $ 9,627,211 $ 10,175,601 $ 9,623,096 $ 9,689,678 $ 9,787,879 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 89% 90% 92% 90% n/a 




Science 79% 83% 88% 87% n/a 


September 

2012 163

1201 Peyton Gin Road . Austin, Texas 78758 . In-District Charter School 

Premier High School at Lanier 

General Fund 



Enrollment n/a n/a n/a 0 120 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 




Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 



Expenditures 


- 

Contracted Services (6200) n/a n/a n/a n/a 511,756 




Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 511,756 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 164

1211 East Oltorf . Austin, Texas 78704 . In-District Charter School 

Premier High School at Travis 

General Fund 





Staff FTEs 

Professional: 




Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 



Expenditures 


- 





Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 511,756 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 165

7104 Berkman Drive . Austin, Texas 78752 . Anabel Garza, Principal 

Reagan High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 885 866 806 1,024 1,038 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 77.85 75.75 79.27 56.50 65.70 

Support: 



Total 108.03 108.50 111.47 75.50 84.70 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - 10,779 17,655 - - 

Total $ 7,387,112 $ 7,749,733 $ 6,911,973 $ 7,044,472 $ 7,220,023 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 63% 74% 80% 80% n/a 




Science 40% 42% 68% 67% n/a 


September 

2012 166

1211 East Oltorf . Austin, Texas 78704 . Ty Davidson, Principal 

Travis High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,405 1,332 1,339 1,473 1,521 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 113.41 107.18 106.65 83.00 92.50 

Support: 



Total 155.57 145.05 141.49 108.00 119.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - 11,995 - - - 

Total $ 9,911,012 $ 9,789,597 $ 8,748,917 $ 9,627,842 $ 9,698,147 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 72% 79% 82% 81% n/a 




Science 55% 61% 71% 72% n/a 


September 

2012 167

le 

AISD Middle Schools 

Bailey Middle School 

Bedichek Middle School 

Burnet Middle School 

Covington Middle School 

Dobie Middle School 

Fulmore Middle School 

Garcia Middle School 

Gorzycki Middle School 

Kealing Middle School 

Lamar Middle School 

Martin Middle School 

Mendez Middle School 

Murchison Middle School 

O. Henry Middle School 

Paredes Middle School 

Pearce Middle School 

Small Middle School 

Webb Middle School 


September 

2012 168

4020 Lost Oasis Hollow . Austin, Texas 78739 . Julia Fletcher, Principal 

Bailey Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,203 956 1,035 988 973 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 


Other Professionals 0.00 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 0.00 

Teachers 74.03 61.77 65.85 61.60 59.60 

Support: 



Total 90.67 75.51 81.23 73.60 73.60 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 6,050,489 $ 5,428,122 $ 5,331,971 $ 5,656,044 $ 5,599,461 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 98% 95% 91% n/a 


Writing 98% 99% 97% 93% n/a 


Science 87% 91% 92% 89% n/a 


September 

2012 169

6800 Bill Hughes Road . Austin, Texas 78745 . Daniel Diehl, Principal 

Bedichek Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,115 1,021 1,052 1,026 1,051 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 85.43 81.19 75.03 69.50 69.00 

Support: 



Total 108.06 104.01 96.58 84.40 84.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 17,714 13,420 9,951 - 1,000 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 7,035,468 $ 6,783,634 $ 6,103,732 $ 6,739,912 $ 6,529,111 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 84% 86% 81% 83% n/a 


Writing 85% 88% 91% 89% n/a 


Science 54% 53% 66% 57% n/a 


September 

2012 170

8401 Hathaway . Austin, Texas 78757 . Cesar Martinez, Principal 

Burnet Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 917 960 994 1,030 1,048 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 77.40 74.03 72.75 64.00 66.00 

Support: 



Total 103.72 95.36 99.42 81.00 81.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 6,386,672 $ 6,156,904 $ 5,923,104 $ 5,774,571 $ 5,860,145 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 78% 74% 67% 71% n/a 


Writing 72% 79% 77% 79% n/a 


Science 49% 48% 49% 53% n/a 


September 

2012 171

3700 Convict Hill Road . Austin, Texas 78749 . Candace Hughes, Principal 

Covington Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 954 951 807 732 700 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 67.62 64.88 60.85 52.50 49.70 

Support: 



Total 87.03 81.98 75.40 64.50 61.70 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 6,519 5,179 8,932 - - 

Equipment (6600) - 6,000 - - - 

Total $ 5,954,355 $ 5,982,880 $ 5,188,263 $ 5,113,791 $ 5,164,003 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 90% 90% 86% 87% n/a 


Writing 89% 94% 89% 91% n/a 


Science 59% 65% 68% 75% n/a 


September 

2012 172

Dobie Middle School 

1200 E. Rundberg Lane. Austin, Texas 78753 . Carol Chapman, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 570 597 615 666 741 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 48.10 46.73 47.19 40.50 47.17 

Support: 



Total 70.80 67.09 66.78 52.50 60.17 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,851,481 $ 4,725,367 $ 4,465,265 $ 4,481,835 $ 5,116,608 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 82% 82% 74% 76% n/a 


Writing 80% 89% 88% 86% n/a 


Science 53% 49% 59% 66% n/a 


September 

2012 173

201 East Mary . Austin, Texas 78704 . Lisa Bush, Principal 

Fulmore Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,040 1,010 990 1,043 1,040 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 70.55 72.70 72.67 65.50 67.50 

Support: 



Total 89.81 89.80 91.14 79.50 82.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - 12,698 - - 

Total $ 6,214,782 $ 6,141,589 $ 5,918,683 $ 5,736,140 $ 5,862,326 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 86% 86% 81% 80% n/a 


Writing 84% 89% 84% 88% n/a 


Science 58% 64% 70% 71% n/a 


September 

2012 174

7414 Johnny Morris Road . Austin, Texas 78724 . Manuel Ornales, Principal 

Garcia Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 656 693 662 421 513 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 54.34 65.01 60.63 42.00 35.60 

Support: 



Total 71.71 82.90 82.49 54.00 46.60 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 5,286,599 $ 5,320,378 $ 4,899,581 $ 4,662,444 $ 4,535,969 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 72% 66% 72% 70% n/a 


Writing 75% 78% 82% 87% n/a 


Science 19% 32% 38% 52% n/a 


September 

2012 175

7412 Slaughter Lane . Austin, Texas 78749 . Vickie Bauerle, Principal 

Gorzycki Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 0 834 963 1,077 1,090 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 0.00 53.54 64.36 61.65 67.65 

Support: 



Total 0.00 71.54 81.10 74.65 82.65 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) 3,993 $ 4,553,760 $ 4,957,949 $ 4,490,588 $ 4,560,596 




Equipment (6600) - 50,786 - - - 

Total $ 55,918 $ 5,274,697 $ 5,254,555 $ 4,682,083 $ 4,773,543 

Per Student Cost $ - $ 6,325 $ 5,456 $ 4,347 $ 4,379 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading n/a n/a 97% 98% n/a 

Mathematics n/a n/a 94% 95% n/a 

Writing n/a n/a 98% 98% n/a 

Social Studies n/a n/a 99% >99% n/a 

Science n/a n/a 95% 96% n/a 


September 

2012 176

1607 Pennsylvania Avenue . Austin, Texas 78702 . Robin Lowe, Principal 

Kealing Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,260 1,240 1,223 1,215 1,205 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 88.58 92.80 89.37 81.90 83.35 

Support: 



Total 105.39 106.72 103.64 94.90 97.35 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 8,795 - - - - 

Total $ 7,305,285 $ 7,460,309 $ 6,943,441 $ 6,893,105 $ 6,897,776 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 93% 93% 91% 91% n/a 


Writing 93% 94% 95% 95% n/a 


Science 83% 84% 85% 81% n/a 


September 

2012 177

6201 Wynona . Austin, Texas 78757 . George Llewellyn, Principal 

Lamar Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 780 663 598 564 599 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 55.83 54.03 52.14 41.10 44.80 

Support: 



Total 68.76 69.94 71.29 55.10 60.80 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 6,512 - 5,359 - - 

Total $ 4,987,696 $ 5,026,907 $ 4,696,661 $ 4,360,405 $ 4,392,533 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 91% 90% 87% 91% n/a 


Writing 88% 88% 94% 91% n/a 


Science 60% 73% 74% 61% n/a 


September 

2012 178

1601 Haskell . Austin, Texas 78702 . Leticia Vega, Principal 

Martin Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 746 677 646 598 534 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 58.87 57.99 56.67 43.50 37.00 

Support: 



Total 79.01 77.26 78.34 56.50 51.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,803,971 $ 4,900,850 $ 4,527,781 $ 4,376,971 $ 4,299,200 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 81% 79% 72% 75% n/a 


Writing 77% 81% 77% 87% n/a 


Science 54% 45% 54% 61% n/a 


September 

2012 179

5106 Village Square . Austin, Texas 78744 . Ron Gonzales, Principal 

Mendez Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 888 865 879 999 1,041 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 74.79 71.78 67.28 56.00 64.60 

Support: 



Total 97.29 93.78 86.39 70.00 78.60 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 8,356 6,282 5,037 2,000 - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 6,123,320 $ 6,092,374 $ 5,538,795 $ 5,750,326 $ 6,371,440 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 78% 72% 65% 69% n/a 


Writing 76% 80% 77% 79% n/a 


Science 53% 57% 50% 53% n/a 


September 

2012 180

3700 North Hills Drive . Austin, Texas 78731 . Sammilu Harrison, Principal 

Murchison Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,161 1,244 1,274 1,360 1,383 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 74.56 79.91 86.88 81.00 85.00 

Support: 



Total 99.52 102.91 110.61 99.00 105.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 11,110 1,200 - - - 

Total $ 6,486,852 $ 6,866,922 $ 6,617,629 $ 6,543,153 $ 6,703,442 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 97% 97% 96% 94% n/a 


Writing 95% 98% 95% 96% n/a 


Science 84% 86% 85% 86% n/a 


September 

2012 181

2610 West 10 th Street . Austin, Texas 78703 . Peter Price, Principal 

O. Henry Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 974 1,004 1,026 1,028 1,037 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 63.14 65.22 68.11 59.00 60.25 

Support: 



Total 82.07 81.90 83.21 71.00 75.75 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 8,024 837 2,200 3,500 3,000 

Equipment (6600) - 12,000 - - - 

Total $ 5,506,436 $ 5,662,645 $ 5,354,625 $ 4,736,954 $ 4,703,976 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 94% 93% 91% 91% n/a 


Writing 91% 96% 95% 94% n/a 


Science 79% 76% 75% 84% n/a 


September 

2012 182

10100 South Mary Moore Searight Drive . Austin, Texas 78748 . Karla Wright, Principal 

Paredes Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 947 889 933 1,032 1,086 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 65.19 63.56 63.42 58.50 65.86 

Support: 



Total 86.69 81.67 81.18 71.50 79.36 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 5,698,497 $ 5,503,490 $ 5,293,535 $ 5,717,007 $ 5,682,163 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 88% 83% 83% n/a 


Writing 85% 90% 89% 89% n/a 


Science 60% 62% 72% 65% n/a 


September 

2012 183

6401 North Hampton . Austin, Texas 78723 . Texana Turner, Principal 

Pearce Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 519 457 329 544 563 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 50.89 49.19 34.29 33.50 39.60 

Support: 



Total 75.13 65.28 52.14 46.50 50.60 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,817,395 $ 5,037,207 $ 3,257,647 $ 4,990,077 $ 3,807,347 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 67% 72% 67% 71% n/a 


Writing 60% 82% 84% 84% n/a 


Science 31% 39% 45% 48% n/a 


September 

2012 184

Small Middle School 

4801 Monterey Oaks Boulevard. Austin, Texas 78749 . Amy Taylor, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,183 949 951 925 955 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 74.43 63.75 64.18 57.00 60.00 

Support: 



Total 98.60 84.21 81.71 75.00 77.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 23,020 7,716 14,908 800 800 

Equipment (6600) - - 5,000 - - 

Total $ 6,461,760 $ 5,646,616 $ 5,317,917 $ 5,766,712 $ 5,623,510 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 97% 97% 94% 92% n/a 


Writing 94% 97% 95% 98% n/a 


Science 81% 89% 91% 84% n/a 


September 

2012 185

601 East St. Johns . Austin, Texas 78752 . Rey Garcia, Principal 

Webb Middle School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 519 572 580 662 735 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 47.92 49.84 53.85 43.00 47.50 

Support: 



Total 68.81 69.43 73.66 55.00 61.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,341,201 $ 4,552,703 $ 4,718,231 $ 4,349,373 $ 4,845,683 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 75% 76% 69% 74% n/a 


Writing 77% 82% 81% 87% n/a 


Science 42% 62% 53% 68% n/a 


September 

2012 186

AISD Elementary Schools 

D Elemery Schools 

Allan Pre-K Center 

Lee Elementary 

Allison Elementary 

Andrews Elementary 

Baldwin Elementary 

Baranoff Elementary 

Barrington Elementary 

Barton Hills Elementary 

Becker Elementary 

Blackshear Elementary 

Blanton Elementary 

Blazier Elementary 

Boone Elementary 

Brentwood Elementary 

Brooke Elementary 

Brown Elementary 

Bryker Woods Elementary 

Campbell Elementary 

Casey Elementary 

Casis Elementary 

Clayton Elementary 

Cook Elementary 

Cowan Elementary 

Cunningham Elementary 

Davis Elementary 

Dawson Elementary 

Dobie Pre-K Center 

Doss Elementary 

Galindo Elementary 

Govalle Elementary 

Graham Elementary 

Gullett Elementary 

Harris Elementary 

Hart Elementary 

Highland Park Elementary 

Hill Elementary 

Houston Elementary 

IDEA Allan K-5 (In-District Charter School) 

Jordan Elementary 

Joslin Elementary 

Kiker Elementary 

Kocurek Elementary 

Langford Elementary 

Linder Elementary 

Maplewood Elementary 

Mathews Elementary 

McBee Elementary 

Menchaca Elementary 

Metz Elementary 

Mills Elementary 

Norman Elementary 

Oak Hill Elementary 

Oak Springs Elementary 

Odom Elementary 

Ortega Elementary 

Overton Elementary 

Palm Elementary 

Patton Elementary 

Pease Elementary 

Pecan Springs Elementary 

Perez Elementary 

Pickle Elementary 

Pillow Elementary 

Pleasant Hill Elementary 

Read Pre-K Demonstration School 

Reilly Elementary 

Ridgetop Elementary 

Rodriguez Elementary 

Sanchez Elementary 

Sims Elementary 

St. Elmo Elementary 

Summit Elementary 

Sunset Valley Elementary 

Travis Heights Elementary 

Uphaus Early Childhood Center 

Walnut Creek Elementary 

Webb Primary Center 

Widen Elementary 

Williams Elementary 

Winn Elementary 

Wooldridge Elementary 

Wooten Elementary 

Zavala Elementary 

Zilker Elementary 


September 

2012 187

4900 Gonzales . Austin, Texas 78702 . Yolanda Capuchino, Administrative Supervisor 

Allan Pre-K Center 

General Fund 



Enrollment 384 388 379 365 58 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 31.38 31.17 32.11 24.00 4.00 

Support: 



Total 41.48 40.67 42.95 31.50 6.50 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 2,436,586 $ 2,573,614 $ 2,397,093 $ 2,473,785 $ 344,776 




Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,615,987 $ 2,731,215 $ 2,498,143 $ 2,714,466 $ 401,974 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 78% 81% 73% 80% n/a 


Writing 85% 80% 84% 83% n/a 


Science 51% 64% 68% 70% n/a 

Note: In FY13 Allan Elementary changed the Allan Pre-K Center. 


September 

2012 188

515 Vargas Road . Austin, Texas 78741 . Guadalupe Velasquez, Principal 

Allison Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 512 529 555 527 536 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 39.50 38.63 40.83 32.50 36.50 

Support: 



Total 46.50 46.37 50.00 39.00 43.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 7,906 6,718 2,335 - 300 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,966,895 $ 2,948,472 $ 2,595,418 $ 3,244,103 $ 3,195,962 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 82% 85% 87% 89% n/a 


Writing 94% 91% 86% 93% n/a 


Science 48% 67% 67% 71% n/a 


September 

2012 189

6801 Northeast Dr. . Austin, Texas 78723 . Laurie Barber, Principal 

Andrews Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 620 572 701 715 723 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 45.33 41.22 51.02 44.00 46.00 

Support: 



Total 55.29 52.93 62.96 51.50 54.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,294,468 $ 3,234,091 $ 3,345,925 $ 3,753,716 $ 3,713,370 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 81% 90% 92% 90% n/a 


Writing 79% 88% 92% 94% n/a 


Science 67% 83% 88% 73% n/a 


September 

2012 190

Baldwin Elementary School 

12200 Meridian Park Blvd. Austin, Texas 78739 . Rosa Pena, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 0 0 506 650 681 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 0.00 0.00 33.37 33.00 43.00 

Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 39.37 38.00 49.00 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ - $ 271,227 $ 2,437,519 $ 2,507,484 $ 1,789,654 

Contracted Services (6200) - 50,909 105,105 252,523 252,190 

Supplies & Materials (6300) - 36,424 93,297 28,336 34,391 

Other Expenses (6400) - 270 5,237 3,800 6,300 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ - $ 358,829 $ 2,641,158 $ 2,792,143 $ 2,082,535 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading n/a n/a n/a 96% n/a 

Mathematics n/a n/a n/a 95% n/a 

Writing n/a n/a n/a 97% n/a 


Science n/a n/a n/a 86% n/a 


September 

2012 191

12009 Buckingham Gate Road . Austin, Texas 78723 . Linda Purvis, Principal 

Baranoff Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 854 852 873 955 984 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 49.00 49.93 50.81 49.00 56.00 

Support: 



Total 55.50 54.43 55.87 54.50 64.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 4,226 1,257 658 2,000 3,250 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,643,937 $ 3,771,200 $ 3,657,584 $ 3,833,268 $ 3,440,252 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 98% 98% 97% n/a 


Writing 98% 97% 99% 97% n/a 


Science 91% 94% 96% 95% n/a 


September 

2012 192

400 Cooper Drive . Austin, Texas 78753 . Gilma Sanchez, Principal 

Barrington Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 871 926 994 1,104 774 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 59.34 64.56 66.91 57.50 47.00 

Support: 



Total 78.68 86.56 89.04 74.50 55.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) 1,016 - - - - 

Total $ 4,383,836 $ 4,842,035 $ 4,491,550 $ 4,996,920 $ 4,150,043 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 79% 74% 73% 82% n/a 


Writing 86% 73% 89% 85% n/a 


Science 55% 70% 69% 80% n/a 


September 

2012 193

2108 Barton Hills Drive . Austin, Texas 78704 . Kati Achtermann, Principal 

Barton Hills Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 372 375 388 391 377 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 25.00 25.00 26.68 25.00 25.90 

Support: 



Total 33.91 33.50 34.06 28.50 30.65 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 685 374 506 1,000 700 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,219,079 $ 2,214,738 $ 2,217,135 $ 2,028,828 $ 2,094,838 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 98% 98% >99% n/a 


Writing 100% 98% 100% 98% n/a 


Science 98% 93% 98% 96% n/a 


September 

2012 194

906 West Milton . Austin, Texas 78704 . La Kesha Drinks, Principal 

Becker Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 192 189 208 280 306 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 18.50 16.89 15.25 17.50 21.00 

Support: 



Total 26.50 24.89 20.56 22.50 26.76 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,820,278 $ 1,588,107 $ 1,469,305 $ 1,848,539 $ 1,827,473 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 68% 74% 95% 98% n/a 


Writing 75% 76% 87% >99% n/a 


Science 76% 54% 94% >99% n/a 


September 

2012 195

1712 East 11 th Street . Austin, Texas 78702 . Betty Jenkins, Principal 

Blackshear Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 265 241 247 239 238 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 18.75 20.48 19.71 20.00 19.00 

Support: 



Total 26.68 26.98 26.83 24.00 23.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,841,202 $ 1,736,471 $ 1,556,506 $ 1,993,694 $ 1,927,362 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 91% 86% 93% 91% n/a 


Writing 93% 97% 97% >99% n/a 


Science 76% 65% 70% 90% n/a 


September 

2012 196

5408 Westminster Drive . Austin, Texas 78723 . Dora Molina, Principal 

Blanton Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 536 560 588 580 580 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 42.49 42.30 42.78 38.50 39.50 

Support: 



Total 52.89 53.02 55.26 46.00 48.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,350,983 $ 3,229,020 $ 3,193,805 $ 3,387,048 $ 3,310,525 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 88% 91% 92% 92% n/a 


Writing 96% 100% 96% 94% n/a 


Science 84% 93% 100% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 197

8601 Vertex Boulevard . Austin, Texas 78744 . Ana Leticia Pena-Wilk, Principal 

Blazier Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 607 727 776 854 895 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 35.72 44.71 50.63 49.50 54.50 

Support: 



Total 43.22 55.21 63.08 57.50 65.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,786,994 $ 3,313,361 $ 3,491,873 $ 3,340,537 $ 3,368,092 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 82% 80% 88% 94% n/a 


Writing 87% 95% 92% 91% n/a 


Science 55% 76% 83% 89% n/a 


September 

2012 198

Boone Elementary School 

8101 Croftwood Drive. Austin, Texas 78749 . Kathleen Noack, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 555 485 501 508 524 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 40.00 37.95 35.34 34.50 37.00 

Support: 



Total 52.50 51.40 49.14 44.00 46.50 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 754 872 1,168 500 500 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,326,826 $ 3,202,256 $ 2,937,828 $ 3,294,717 $ 3,294,931 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 93% 95% 99% 97% n/a 


Writing 96% 95% 100% 99% n/a 


Science 79% 91% 87% 96% n/a 


September 

2012 199

6700 Arroyo Seco . Austin, Texas 78757 . Katherine Williams-Carter, Principal 

Brentwood Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 447 477 488 518 528 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 37.32 37.02 37.98 34.13 33.13 

Support: 



Total 52.45 52.11 48.80 42.63 43.63 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,671,237 $ 2,679,140 $ 2,622,482 $ 2,669,872 $ 2,683,009 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 96% 86% 90% 94% n/a 


Writing 93% 98% 96% 97% n/a 


Science 58% 76% 83% 88% n/a 


September 

2012 200

3100 East 4 th Street . Austin, Texas 78702 . Elia Diaz-Ortiz, Principal 

Brooke Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 410 414 433 408 402 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 29.86 29.06 33.77 31.00 29.50 

Support: 



Total 41.86 44.52 49.42 41.00 37.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 7,702 4,140 3,954 1,200 200 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,644,260 $ 2,675,669 $ 2,599,081 $ 2,650,667 $ 2,583,650 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 89% 86% 86% 85% n/a 


Writing 84% 94% 96% 86% n/a 


Science 76% 89% 83% 74% n/a 


September 

2012 201

505 West Anderson . Austin, Texas 78752 . Veronica Sharp, Principal 

Brown Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 519 502 521 494 482 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 37.00 36.74 38.73 35.00 36.00 

Support: 



Total 45.00 48.10 51.04 43.00 45.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,829,045 $ 2,977,222 $ 2,778,317 $ 2,925,062 $ 3,054,789 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 71% 73% 80% 84% n/a 


Writing 87% 87% 75% 75% n/a 


Science 53% 52% 76% 68% n/a 


September 

2012 202

3309 Kerbey Lane . Austin, Texas 78703 . Jane Kronke, Principal 

Bryker Woods Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 400 400 405 379 377 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 28.10 29.00 26.46 25.50 25.90 

Support: 



Total 33.10 33.00 31.66 29.00 30.40 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,240,405 $ 2,282,771 $ 2,190,698 $ 2,176,041 $ 2,135,947 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 99% 95% 98% n/a 


Writing 98% 98% 94% >99% n/a 


Science 100% 92% 98% 88% n/a 


September 

2012 203

2613 Rogers Avenue . Austin, Texas 78722 . Lisa Bohanan, Principal 

Campbell Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 379 393 360 316 316 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 26.38 28.35 30.00 24.50 25.50 

Support: 



Total 31.38 34.35 38.50 29.00 31.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,068,805 $ 2,278,089 $ 2,085,030 $ 2,063,101 $ 2,072,590 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 93% 82% 82% 89% n/a 


Writing 96% 87% 89% 95% n/a 


Science 87% 57% 64% 63% n/a 


September 

2012 204

9400 Texas Oaks Drive . Austin, Texas 78748 . Jean Bahney, Principal 

Casey Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 665 656 673 643 636 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 47.50 42.27 44.28 44.00 44.00 

Support: 



Total 55.50 55.27 57.70 52.00 53.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 1,456 489 984 2,000 2,000 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,498,684 $ 3,403,404 $ 3,291,763 $ 3,714,083 $ 3,760,547 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 84% 87% 88% n/a 


Writing 85% 85% 83% 87% n/a 


Science 67% 79% 74% 86% n/a 


September 

2012 205

2710 Exposition Boulevard . Austin, Texas 78703 . Patricia Martin, Principal 

Casis Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 829 815 821 846 857 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 


Other Professionals 0.00 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 0.00 

Teachers 49.50 51.94 55.15 48.50 51.58 

Support: 



Total 62.50 66.52 70.97 57.50 61.58 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 258 - 23 - - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,809,329 $ 4,048,136 $ 3,955,660 $ 3,776,229 $ 3,773,956 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 100% 98% 99% 99% n/a 


Writing 99% 97% 98% >99% n/a 


Science 95% 97% 98% 98% n/a 


September 

2012 206

7525 LaCrosse Avenue . Austin, Texas 78739 . Dru McGovern-Robinett, Principal 

Clayton Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 985 970 871 885 873 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 60.58 57.66 55.14 53.50 54.33 

Support: 



Total 78.24 75.64 71.51 66.00 66.33 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,851,671 $ 4,746,676 $ 4,324,472 $ 5,431,363 $ 5,029,466 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 99% 98% 99% n/a 


Writing 95% 97% 95% 99% n/a 


Science 92% 95% 94% 97% n/a 


September 

2012 207

1511 Cripple Creek . Austin, Texas 78758 . Wendy Mills, Principal 

Cook Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 904 900 908 955 965 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 55.94 58.89 58.28 47.50 58.50 

Support: 



Total 70.92 71.83 74.96 57.00 66.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,236,222 $ 4,367,688 $ 4,238,912 $ 4,262,177 $ 4,276,425 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 77% 82% 87% 83% n/a 


Writing 78% 88% 94% 96% n/a 


Science 56% 70% 85% 68% n/a 


September 

2012 208

2817 Kentish Drive . Austin, Texas 78748 . Deborah Warnken, Principal 

Cowan Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 704 742 781 790 808 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 45.78 46.87 48.05 46.50 48.50 

Support: 



Total 56.78 56.87 58.67 55.50 57.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,672,609 $ 3,656,661 $ 3,473,283 $ 3,728,699 $ 3,727,943 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 96% 97% 94% 94% n/a 


Writing 93% 90% 97% 98% n/a 


Science 90% 90% 95% 92% n/a 


September 

2012 209

2200 Berkeley Avenue . Austin, Texas 78743 . Amy Lloyd, Principal 

Cunningham Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 537 556 513 490 480 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 38.81 38.32 37.90 35.50 36.00 

Support: 



Total 48.81 47.32 47.98 45.00 46.50 



Expenditures 


Contracted Services (6200) 100,241 101,533 1,352,702 116,171 116,622 



Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,144,171 $ 3,043,951 $ 4,197,488 $ 2,994,549 $ 3,015,256 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 88% 87% 86% 89% n/a 


Writing 93% 84% 92% 81% n/a 


Science 84% 89% 87% 83% n/a 


September 

2012 210

5214 Duval Road . Austin, Texas 78727 . Douglas Hall, Principal 

Davis Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 620 703 676 687 696 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 39.88 42.71 44.83 44.50 47.33 

Support: 



Total 54.00 56.83 58.36 53.50 56.33 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 270 315 243 500 200 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,163,715 $ 3,378,019 $ 3,327,197 $ 3,121,657 $ 3,128,179 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 96% 97% 97% 96% n/a 


Writing 94% 98% 94% 95% n/a 


Science 92% 93% 95% 91% n/a 


September 

2012 211

3001 South 1 st Street . Austin, Texas 78704 . Shannon Sellstrom, Principal 

Dawson Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 333 333 329 340 342 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 34.00 31.38 30.80 30.50 31.50 

Support: 



Total 47.00 45.38 46.02 42.00 42.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,831,065 $ 2,839,488 $ 2,616,755 $ 2,802,180 $ 2,855,121 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 93% 91% 95% 96% n/a 


Writing 88% 97% 91% >99% n/a 


Science 91% 78% 91% 95% n/a 


September 

2012 212

Dobie Pre-K Center 

1200 E. Rundberg Lane. Austin, Texas 78753 . Courtney Roberson, Director 

General Fund 




Student/Teacher Ratio n/a n/a n/a n/a 16.88 

Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.00 

Other Professionals n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.00 

Teachers n/a n/a n/a n/a 16.00 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.50 

Educational Aides n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.50 

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.00 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 501,745 


Supplies & Materials (6300) n/a n/a n/a n/a 8,750 

Other Expenses (6400) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,150 


Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 516,885 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 213

7005 Northledge Drive . Austin, Texas 78731 . Jana Griffin, Principal 

Doss Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 672 721 774 790 816 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 43.78 45.22 46.64 46.00 52.00 

Support: 



Total 57.00 57.72 59.52 55.00 61.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,468,667 $ 3,524,706 $ 3,446,024 $ 3,461,282 $ 3,525,585 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 100% 99% 98% 99% n/a 


Writing 100% 100% 97% 98% n/a 


Science 97% 100% 96% 99% n/a 


September 

2012 214

3800 S. 2 nd Street . Austin, Texas 78704 . Donna Linn, Principal 

Galindo Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 717 719 701 677 676 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 56.91 55.80 55.03 45.00 47.00 

Support: 



Total 74.91 74.54 73.98 59.00 59.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,271,594 $ 4,358,820 $ 3,744,665 $ 4,250,639 $ 4,068,931 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 93% 92% 89% n/a 


Writing 83% 89% 95% 93% n/a 


Science 69% 79% 76% 89% n/a 


September 

2012 215

3601 Govalle Avenue . Austin, Texas 78702 . Nancy Maniscalco, Principal 

Govalle Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 414 402 400 478 587 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 30.50 31.71 31.27 30.50 40.00 

Support: 



Total 43.50 44.21 44.52 38.50 48.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,538,500 $ 2,553,534 $ 2,317,691 $ 2,599,696 $ 2,805,518 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 77% 82% 78% 81% n/a 


Writing 76% 82% 80% 77% n/a 


Science 58% 54% 72% 82% n/a 


September 

2012 216

11211 Tom Adams Drive . Austin, Texas 78753 . Blaine Helwig, Principal 

Graham Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 617 658 755 818 755 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 46.04 46.12 48.85 46.50 47.00 

Support: 



Total 56.00 64.09 68.07 60.50 55.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,431,615 $ 3,663,896 $ 3,517,062 $ 4,108,238 $ 3,756,322 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 96% 96% 96% n/a 


Writing 95% 98% 97% 97% n/a 


Science 72% 89% 97% 93% n/a 


September 

2012 217

6310 Treadwell Boulevard . Austin, Texas 78757 . Janie Ruiz, Principal 

Gullett Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 482 527 540 564 572 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 34.45 35.73 35.63 35.00 39.00 

Support: 



Total 47.07 48.00 50.09 47.21 48.25 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 749 1,466 210 150 - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,941,178 $ 3,073,009 $ 3,065,921 $ 2,837,099 $ 2,829,194 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 97% 98% 97% 98% n/a 


Writing 96% 100% 100% 92% n/a 


Science 91% 96% 96% 96% n/a 


September 

2012 218

1711 Wheless Lane . Austin, Texas 78723 . Gloria Arrendondo, Principal 

Harris Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 710 737 758 728 734 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 46.00 46.33 50.51 41.50 46.50 

Support: 



Total 57.78 61.83 64.41 49.50 55.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,275,544 $ 3,728,436 $ 3,486,468 $ 3,525,829 $ 3,498,750 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 84% 84% 79% n/a 


Writing 97% 93% 94% 93% n/a 


Science 57% 66% 89% 74% n/a 


September 

2012 219

Hart Elementary School 

8301 Furness Drive. Austin, Texas 78753 . Leslie Dusing, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 822 850 892 961 840 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 52.15 52.24 55.86 52.00 50.50 

Support: 



Total 69.12 70.64 73.86 61.50 59.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,050,811 $ 4,197,475 $ 4,066,214 $ 4,269,425 $ 3,941,487 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 67% 73% 81% 89% n/a 


Writing 83% 84% 90% 93% n/a 


Science 40% 70% 79% 87% n/a 


September 

2012 220

4900 Fairview . Austin, Texas 78731 . Tammie Workman, Principal 

Highland Park Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 600 634 660 648 657 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 40.79 42.05 43.01 42.12 41.50 

Support: 



Total 52.57 53.37 55.16 52.62 50.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,182,161 $ 3,391,930 $ 3,414,512 $ 3,137,051 $ 3,193,856 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 99% 99% >99% n/a 


Writing 98% 98% 95% 98% n/a 


Science 99% 99% 97% 98% n/a 


September 

2012 221

8601 Tallwood Drive . Austin, Texas 78759 . Beth Ellis, Principal 

Hill Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 707 691 735 769 794 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 41.43 41.94 46.34 45.58 46.63 

Support: 



Total 53.18 49.94 56.89 54.08 56.88 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) - - 1,391 - - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,311,921 $ 3,386,730 $ 3,351,944 $ 3,268,953 $ 3,392,762 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 99% 99% >99% n/a 


Writing 99% 93% 100% >99% n/a 


Science 95% 98% 96% 99% n/a 


September 

2012 222

Houston Elementary School 

5409 Ponciana Drive . Austin, Texas 78744 .Elia Diaz-Camarillo, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 941 958 920 898 882 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 60.07 63.62 62.49 53.50 55.99 

Support: 



Total 78.07 79.70 78.17 63.00 67.49 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,582,672 $ 4,686,810 $ 4,062,671 $ 4,682,382 $ 4,647,484 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 80% 78% 83% 80% n/a 


Writing 92% 83% 89% 73% n/a 


Science 51% 66% 84% 72% n/a 


September 

2012 223

4900 Gonzales . Austin, Texas 78702 . In-District Charter School 

IDEA Allan K-5 

General Fund 





Staff FTEs 

Professional: 




Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 



Expenditures 


- 

Contracted Services (6200) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1,845,215 




Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,845,215 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 224

6711 Johnny Morris Road . Austin, Texas 78724 . Diana Vallejo, Principal 

Jordan Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 736 810 831 848 763 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 49.16 56.35 56.46 49.50 47.50 

Support: 



Total 63.16 72.20 71.92 57.00 55.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,574,357 $ 4,186,697 $ 3,801,821 $ 4,051,465 $ 4,007,576 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 86% 78% 82% 83% n/a 


Writing 83% 87% 84% 87% n/a 


Science 53% 49% 79% 70% n/a 


September 

2012 225

4500 Manchaca Road . Austin, Texas 78745 . Jennifer Pace, Principal 

Joslin Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 336 323 362 320 330 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 31.32 30.32 31.84 27.50 25.50 

Support: 



Total 43.82 43.82 45.52 33.00 33.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 3,065 2,570 1,801 1,100 500 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,334,371 $ 2,331,314 $ 2,191,091 $ 2,468,776 $ 2,459,765 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 88% 98% 99% 95% n/a 


Writing 90% 97% 95% 97% n/a 


Science 93% 97% 100% 94% n/a 


September 

2012 226

Kiker Elementary School 

5913 La Crosse Avenue. Austin, Texas 78739 . Lori Schneider, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 711 907 932 945 952 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 48.00 55.38 59.00 56.00 58.84 

Support: 



Total 63.00 73.38 78.62 69.50 71.34 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,804,984 $ 4,264,136 $ 4,315,950 $ 3,997,314 $ 3,993,674 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 99% 99% >99% n/a 


Writing 100% 98% 97% >99% n/a 


Science 95% 97% 100% 97% n/a 


September 

2012 227

9800 Curlew Drive . Austin, Texas 78748 . Deanna McParland, Principal 

Kocurek Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 677 639 663 659 669 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 44.50 44.32 42.45 41.50 42.00 

Support: 



Total 55.50 58.32 52.62 51.00 51.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,604,934 $ 3,660,307 $ 3,261,570 $ 3,648,459 $ 3,810,081 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 89% 85% 86% 86% n/a 


Writing 85% 84% 92% 92% n/a 


Science 71% 83% 77% 87% n/a 


September 

2012 228

2206 Blue Meadow . Austin, Texas 78744 . Dounna Poth, Principal 

Langford Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 843 843 847 807 807 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 59.38 58.48 55.05 47.50 48.50 

Support: 



Total 78.81 73.25 70.38 57.50 58.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,352,140 $ 4,194,672 $ 3,801,818 $ 4,150,194 $ 4,605,887 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 69% 70% 77% 72% n/a 


Writing 75% 74% 78% 78% n/a 


Science 57% 58% 70% 73% n/a 


September 

2012 229

3308 Hampton Road . Austin, Texas 78705 . Elyse Smith, Principal 

Lee Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 406 441 427 403 396 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 27.09 28.86 29.58 27.00 25.90 

Support: 



Total 32.59 34.36 34.82 32.50 32.40 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,207,210 $ 2,296,307 $ 2,248,506 $ 2,131,435 $ 2,183,215 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 100% 100% 99% 98% n/a 


Writing 99% 98% 96% 99% n/a 


Science 95% 98% 100% 97% n/a 


September 

2012 230

2800 Metcalf Avenue . Austin, Texas 78741 . Beverly Odom, Principal 

Linder Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 877 836 882 866 758 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 52.97 56.21 55.63 56.00 37.00 

Support: 



Total 65.83 69.95 67.45 63.00 43.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,069,295 $ 4,256,740 $ 3,771,090 $ 4,442,148 $ 4,467,626 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 78% 81% 81% 77% n/a 


Writing 89% 84% 93% 89% n/a 


Science 67% 56% 79% 62% n/a 


September 

2012 231

3308 Maplewood Avenue . Austin, Texas 78722 . Vickie Jacobson, Principal 

Maplewood Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 367 420 405 428 453 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 30.71 31.22 30.71 29.60 32.00 

Support: 



Total 44.00 45.36 42.21 38.10 41.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,563,350 $ 2,771,859 $ 2,369,953 $ 2,500,940 $ 2,505,499 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 83% 84% 83% 91% n/a 


Writing 79% 92% 89% 89% n/a 


Science 61% 70% 86% 96% n/a 


September 

2012 232

906 West Lynn . Austin, Texas 78703 . Amy Kinkade, Principal 

Mathews Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 411 391 410 392 400 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 30.35 30.88 29.80 28.15 27.55 

Support: 



Total 39.85 40.88 37.52 31.53 30.93 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 3,455 2,218 855 2,000 800 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,431,868 $ 2,409,703 $ 2,169,071 $ 2,422,971 $ 2,444,858 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 95% 97% 95% 95% n/a 


Writing 91% 91% 98% 93% n/a 


Science 84% 85% 88% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 233

McBee Elementary School 

1001 West Braker Lane. Austin, Texas 78758 . Rafael Soriano, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 740 806 757 760 747 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 51.12 52.51 52.54 45.00 46.00 

Support: 



Total 58.48 62.97 63.49 52.50 54.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,736,872 $ 3,809,596 $ 3,550,638 $ 3,668,085 $ 3,596,262 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 84% 89% 86% 90% n/a 


Writing 93% 94% 94% 96% n/a 


Science 59% 81% 75% 77% n/a 


September 

2012 234

12120 Manchaca Road . Austin, Texas 78748 . John Rocha, Principal 

Menchaca Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 631 698 675 698 713 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 47.04 47.86 46.88 43.19 46.50 

Support: 



Total 62.04 62.81 60.88 54.19 56.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,663,090 $ 3,854,033 $ 3,478,344 $ 3,391,927 $ 3,417,638 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 92% 92% 92% 92% n/a 


Writing 85% 90% 88% 92% n/a 


Science 82% 78% 80% 86% n/a 


September 

2012 235

84 Robert T. Martinez Jr. . Austin, Texas 78702 . Martha Castillo, Principal 

Metz Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 544 491 503 521 529 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 39.50 32.89 38.27 32.00 36.50 

Support: 



Total 49.50 45.89 48.56 38.00 43.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,953,880 $ 2,819,115 $ 2,565,871 $ 3,013,118 $ 2,961,938 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 84% 87% 91% 86% n/a 


Writing 93% 94% 93% 85% n/a 


Science 81% 72% 90% 88% n/a 


September 

2012 236

6201 Davis Lane . Austin, Texas 78749 . Patricia Butler, Principal 

Mills Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 1,058 1,097 932 912 882 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 65.09 67.81 59.25 55.00 54.00 

Support: 



Total 81.07 81.31 75.72 67.50 65.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,861,928 $ 5,085,099 $ 4,464,641 $ 4,918,440 $ 4,894,493 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 99% 98% 99% 98% n/a 


Writing 98% 98% 98% 96% n/a 


Science 93% 98% 95% 89% n/a 


September 

2012 237

4001 Tannehill Lane . Austin, Texas 78721 . Floretta Andrews, Principal 

Norman Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 382 314 326 335 307 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 28.88 26.94 27.00 21.00 23.00 

Support: 



Total 33.38 34.16 35.23 25.00 31.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,380,903 $ 2,257,792 $ 2,288,791 $ 2,351,152 $ 2,366,276 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 64% 82% 84% 91% n/a 


Writing 77% 96% 97% 98% n/a 


Science 44% 64% 82% 71% n/a 


September 

2012 238

6101 Patton Ranch Road . Austin, Texas 78735 . Cathryn Mitchell, Principal 

Oak Hill Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 951 993 757 758 763 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 61.54 66.48 51.49 45.00 49.50 

Support: 



Total 72.92 75.48 61.99 52.00 58.50 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 455 - 132 - - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,567,984 $ 4,848,663 $ 3,740,930 $ 4,284,010 $ 4,313,851 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 97% 96% 96% 96% n/a 


Writing 98% 96% 97% 98% n/a 


Science 80% 89% 93% 98% n/a 


September 

2012 239

3601 Webberville Road . Austin, Texas 78702 . Monica Woods, Principal 

Oak Springs Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 319 303 284 291 300 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 29.21 25.42 25.24 21.00 23.00 

Support: 



Total 38.50 35.32 33.17 25.00 28.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,198,982 $ 2,058,903 $ 1,918,711 $ 2,213,285 $ 2,246,343 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 71% 68% 86% 91% n/a 


Writing 67% 76% 100% 92% n/a 


Science 64% 66% 87% 70% n/a 


September 

2012 240

1010 Turtle Creek Boulevard . Austin, Texas 78745 . Sondra McWilliams, Principal 

Odom Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 712 688 663 678 678 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 49.94 45.71 44.52 40.40 43.00 

Support: 



Total 58.94 57.71 56.06 48.90 51.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,686,496 $ 3,664,355 $ 3,216,973 $ 3,663,524 $ 3,667,524 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 78% 85% 85% 85% n/a 


Writing 92% 82% 92% 92% n/a 


Science 62% 71% 75% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 241

1135 Garland Avenue . Austin, Texas 78721 . Anna Pedroza, Principal 

Ortega Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 257 284 295 285 399 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 23.42 25.11 26.59 23.00 28.00 

Support: 



Total 32.65 35.71 35.07 30.50 34.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,945,041 $ 2,129,244 $ 1,997,650 $ 2,047,629 $ 2,258,629 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 91% 94% 96% 97% n/a 


Writing 100% 100% 100% >99% n/a 


Science 84% 91% 97% 71% n/a 


September 

2012 242

7201 Colony Loop . Austin, Texas 78724 . Courtney Colvin, Principal 

Overton Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment n/a 716 655 780 709 

Student/Teacher Ratio n/a 15.23 14.18 18.57 15.76 

Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration n/a 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 

Other Professionals n/a 3.27 4.00 0.00 0.00 

Teachers n/a 47.01 46.19 42.00 45.00 

Support: 

Professional Support Staff n/a 3.50 4.32 2.00 2.00 

Educational Aides n/a 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 

Total n/a 59.77 61.51 50.00 53.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,271,340 $ 3,524,846 $ 3,292,589 $ 3,269,321 $ 3,282,802 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 73% 87% 92% 90% n/a 


Writing 89% 96% 99% 95% n/a 


Science 71% 71% 87% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 243

7601 Dixie Drive . Austin, Texas 78744 . Joanne Garza, Principal 

Palm Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 666 661 603 555 543 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 45.11 44.73 43.05 37.50 39.50 

Support: 



Total 57.11 57.45 54.82 43.50 47.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,409,696 $ 3,424,359 $ 2,998,488 $ 3,277,698 $ 3,283,885 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 81% 74% 87% 86% n/a 


Writing 91% 77% 86% 85% n/a 


Science 54% 67% 75% 80% n/a 


September 

2012 244

6001 Westbrook . Austin, Texas 78749 . Alan Stevens, Principal 

Patton Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 732 765 922 996 997 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 46.50 45.70 53.42 55.50 59.00 

Support: 



Total 54.50 56.70 64.64 64.50 67.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,680,737 $ 3,812,466 $ 4,082,186 $ 4,089,874 $ 3,970,590 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 97% 98% 97% 95% n/a 


Writing 95% 99% 99% 96% n/a 


Science 83% 96% 98% 97% n/a 


September 

2012 245

1106 Rio Grande . Austin, Texas 78701 . Donna Martinez, Principal 

Pease Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 254 251 257 256 270 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 17.50 18.00 17.48 18.32 18.22 

Support: 



Total 20.88 21.46 21.78 21.82 21.72 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) - 397 449 600 100 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,469,307 $ 1,505,972 $ 1,493,237 $ 1,527,420 $ 1,550,080 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 94% 95% 96% 95% n/a 


Writing 94% 97% 100% 97% n/a 


Science 81% 100% 89% 87% n/a 


September 

2012 246

3100 Rogge Lane . Austin, Texas 78723 . Elaine McKinney, Principal 

Pecan Springs Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 505 523 541 463 461 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 40.00 37.88 45.47 30.50 33.00 

Support: 



Total 53.00 47.82 56.99 37.00 40.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,997,501 $ 2,909,052 $ 2,876,797 $ 2,905,238 $ 2,879,631 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 82% 76% 80% 83% n/a 


Writing 94% 83% 78% 90% n/a 


Science 78% 63% 83% 69% n/a 


September 

2012 247

7500 S. Pleasant Valley Road . Austin, Texas 78744 . David Kauffman, Principal 

Perez Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 700 800 881 904 950 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 53.16 54.35 59.78 55.00 57.50 

Support: 



Total 64.50 64.09 70.84 62.50 67.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,854,450 $ 4,120,809 $ 4,055,784 $ 4,266,519 $ 4,096,370 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 82% 86% 79% 85% n/a 


Writing 91% 91% 96% 86% n/a 


Science 69% 81% 79% 83% n/a 


September 

2012 248

1101 Wheatley Drive . Austin, Texas 78752 . Joel De La Garza, Principal 

Pickle Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 715 722 734 757 760 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 50.39 49.10 49.21 47.50 49.50 

Support: 



Total 59.06 63.30 64.64 55.00 59.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,721,861 $ 3,944,192 $ 3,590,860 $ 4,345,245 $ 4,269,352 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 77% 78% 76% 83% n/a 


Writing 73% 90% 90% 90% n/a 


Science 56% 60% 83% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 249

3025 Crosscreek Drive . Austin, Texas 78758 . Tonya King, Principal 

Pillow Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 568 648 657 672 688 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 40.50 43.56 44.47 42.50 44.00 

Support: 



Total 53.00 55.06 60.27 53.50 55.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 669 892 196 500 500 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,238,981 $ 3,603,821 $ 3,374,835 $ 3,521,276 $ 3,533,211 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 95% 93% 91% 92% n/a 


Writing 98% 98% 89% 91% n/a 


Science 94% 98% 96% 81% n/a 


September 

2012 250

6405 Circle S Road . Austin, Texas 78745 . Sharon Stoner, Principal 

Pleasant Hill Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 629 623 618 610 623 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 40.98 41.39 45.29 39.50 42.00 

Support: 



Total 54.98 52.30 59.38 47.50 50.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,196,935 $ 3,485,694 $ 3,267,277 $ 3,458,833 $ 3,438,102 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 75% 76% 80% 82% n/a 


Writing 73% 77% 82% 87% n/a 


Science 47% 58% 75% 71% n/a 


September 

2012 251

2608 RichCreek . Austin, Texas 78757 . Ami Cortes, Principal 

Read Pre-K Demonstration School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 556 481 510 471 479 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 38.00 29.38 33.74 27.00 28.50 

Support: 



Total 45.00 35.38 41.05 33.00 38.50 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 1,863,363 $ 1,931,694 $ 923,517 $ 2,912,484 $ 2,838,946 




Equipment (6600) - 401 - - - 

Total $ 2,005,659 $ 2,082,708 $ 1,065,085 $ 3,100,225 $ 3,022,180 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 252

405 Denson Drive . Austin, Texas 78752 . Dinorah Bores, Principal 

Reilly Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 274 304 302 324 418 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 21.50 24.19 26.68 21.00 27.00 

Support: 



Total 26.50 31.19 34.17 27.50 33.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,714,363 $ 1,850,381 $ 1,839,062 $ 1,904,606 $ 2,135,697 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 87% 91% 89% 84% n/a 


Writing 96% 96% 100% 88% n/a 


Science 97% 83% 100% 85% n/a 


September 

2012 253

5005 Caswell Avenue . Austin, Texas 78751 . Joaquin Gloria, Principal 

Ridgetop Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 196 188 220 292 315 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 18.00 18.88 19.66 21.00 25.50 

Support: 



Total 22.75 24.63 26.26 27.00 32.25 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,507,990 $ 1,590,858 $ 1,603,941 $ 1,759,255 $ 1,781,712 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 79% 88% 93% 92% n/a 


Writing 81% 89% 95% >99% n/a 


Science 50% 71% 95% 67% n/a 


September 

2012 254

4400 Franklin Park Drive . Austin, Texas 78744 . Monica Villasenor, Principal 

Rodriguez Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 977 955 922 944 824 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 64.82 61.49 56.71 49.50 58.50 

Support: 



Total 80.42 76.30 73.46 61.00 68.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 15,211 4,836 8,688 500 3,500 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,607,159 $ 4,595,650 $ 4,169,947 $ 4,693,620 $ 4,564,070 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 75% 73% 70% 77% n/a 


Writing 83% 82% 85% 92% n/a 


Science 60% 55% 71% 69% n/a 


September 

2012 255

73 San Marcos . Austin, Texas 78702 . Azucena Garcia, Principal 

Sanchez Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 608 617 597 587 287 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 41.42 43.22 45.00 36.00 37.50 

Support: 



Total 54.84 55.46 56.22 46.00 46.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,244,686 $ 3,545,698 $ 3,158,521 $ 3,451,451 $ 3,508,877 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 85% 81% 87% 89% n/a 


Writing 95% 86% 96% 90% n/a 


Science 70% 54% 82% 90% n/a 


September 

2012 256

1203 Springdale Road . Austin, Texas 78721 . Freda Mills, Principal 

Sims Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 401 314 275 310 571 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 29.85 25.61 24.14 21.00 24.00 

Support: 



Total 43.85 35.61 33.29 24.00 29.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,492,761 $ 2,130,373 $ 1,846,062 $ 2,349,634 $ 2,325,260 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 86% 82% 93% 97% n/a 


Writing 85% 90% 98% 95% n/a 


Science 65% 76% 83% 63% n/a 


September 

2012 257

600 West St. Elmo Road . Austin, Texas 78745 . Adriana Gonzales, Principal 

St. Elmo Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 357 347 304 287 291 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 29.00 26.82 27.00 22.00 22.00 

Support: 



Total 35.50 33.32 34.98 27.50 26.71 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 4,084 1,718 1,887 700 1,600 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,268,899 $ 2,346,507 $ 2,103,036 $ 2,218,143 $ 2,388,733 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 84% 92% 93% 92% n/a 


Writing 85% 89% 93% >99% n/a 


Science 67% 80% 83% >99% n/a 


September 

2012 258

12207 Brigadoon Lane . Austin, Texas 78727 . Dedra Standish, Principal 

Summitt Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 702 747 850 751 781 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 49.10 52.75 55.68 56.50 48.50 

Support: 



Total 62.45 64.25 68.24 65.00 56.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,790,385 $ 3,997,927 $ 3,999,223 $ 4,199,380 $ 3,870,040 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 95% 95% 93% n/a 


Writing 98% 96% 97% 95% n/a 


Science 86% 96% 94% 88% n/a 


September 

2012 259

3000 Jones Road . Austin, Texas 78745 . Kim Placker, Principal 

Sunset Valley Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 443 464 444 499 505 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 38.00 38.82 39.00 33.31 38.50 

Support: 



Total 48.00 51.82 50.74 40.81 47.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,213,936 $ 3,437,811 $ 3,172,581 $ 3,510,365 $ 3,505,189 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 83% 86% 84% 92% n/a 


Writing 94% 87% 94% 92% n/a 


Science 57% 83% 92% 78% n/a 


September 

2012 260

2010 Alameda Drive . Austin, Texas 78704 . Lisa Robertson, Principal 

Travis Heights Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 564 525 540 540 549 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 44.00 39.79 39.33 37.50 39.00 

Support: 



Total 57.00 54.27 52.31 44.75 46.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - 54,626 - - 

Total $ 3,346,867 $ 3,132,055 $ 2,931,012 $ 3,496,288 $ 3,199,844 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 85% 86% 89% 89% n/a 


Writing 83% 83% 89% 89% n/a 


Science 52% 85% 85% 79% n/a 


September 

2012 261

Uphaus Early Childhood Center 

5200 Freidrich Lane. Austin, Texas 78744 . Janice Darrington Weston, Principal 

General Fund 





Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration n/a n/a n/a 0.00 2.00 



Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.50 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 1,428,480 





Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,533,094 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 262

4010 West Braker Lane . Austin, Texas 78753 . Paul Perez, Principal 

Walnut Creek Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 764 901 928 930 948 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 49.67 56.99 56.82 54.00 59.00 

Support: 



Total 67.96 76.47 76.22 65.50 70.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,096,370 $ 4,503,371 $ 4,092,253 $ 4,327,533 $ 4,319,487 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 83% 79% 73% 82% n/a 


Writing 93% 79% 85% 87% n/a 


Science 57% 68% 73% 72% n/a 


September 

2012 263

601 East St. Johns . Austin, Texas 78752 . Dolores Godinez, Director 

Webb Primary Center 

General Fund 





Staff FTEs 

Professional: 

Campus Administration n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.00 



Support: 



Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.00 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) n/a n/a n/a n/a $ 306,408 

Contracted Services (6200) n/a n/a n/a n/a - 




Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 323,168 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 264

5606 Nuckols Crossing . Austin, Texas 78744 . Kimberly Royal, Principal 

Widen Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 822 804 782 747 739 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 57.49 53.57 55.37 46.00 51.50 

Support: 



Total 73.99 69.08 71.19 55.50 62.00 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 12,043 6,484 1,854 - 750 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,149,817 $ 4,095,441 $ 3,651,240 $ 4,119,700 $ 4,419,768 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 73% 76% 69% 69% n/a 


Writing 70% 92% 80% 90% n/a 


Science 68% 66% 75% 79% n/a 


September 

2012 265

500 Mario . Austin, Texas 78748 . Vesta Bertino, Principal 

Williams Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 691 668 634 618 606 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 48.98 49.80 48.18 43.50 42.50 

Support: 



Total 64.98 67.30 67.54 59.50 58.50 



Expenditures 




Other Expenses (6400) 149 171 2,930 1,000 5,162 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,874,185 $ 3,969,698 $ 3,659,788 $ 4,068,852 $ 3,966,682 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 89% 85% 88% 84% n/a 


Writing 91% 86% 95% 82% n/a 


Science 52% 67% 74% 73% n/a 


September 

2012 266

3500 Susquehanna Lane . Austin, Texas 78723 . Cynthia Gonzales, Principal 

Winn Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 425 440 480 394 384 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 34.36 32.87 34.31 28.30 29.50 

Support: 



Total 46.17 43.15 45.53 36.30 38.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,684,609 $ 2,602,675 $ 2,629,330 $ 2,855,117 $ 2,799,817 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 69% 79% 80% 83% n/a 


Writing 88% 88% 96% 94% n/a 


Science 45% 96% 83% 68% n/a 


September 

2012 267

Wooldridge Elementary School 

1412 Norseman Terrace . Austin, Texas 78758 .Sheri Mull, Principal 

General Fund 



Enrollment 839 881 878 909 914 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 55.57 54.74 57.00 48.50 55.00 

Support: 



Total 67.46 70.74 72.66 58.00 61.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 4,129,301 $ 4,190,964 $ 4,151,001 $ 4,199,695 $ 4,141,787 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 89% 90% 85% 86% n/a 


Writing 96% 93% 94% 95% n/a 


Science 53% 82% 74% 73% n/a 


September 

2012 268

1406 Dale . Austin, Texas 78757 . Ron Bolek, Principal 

Wooten Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 675 682 703 674 675 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 45.00 49.99 50.64 44.00 46.00 

Support: 



Total 63.00 65.56 65.81 58.50 58.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,530,046 $ 3,837,588 $ 3,682,693 $ 3,761,507 $ 3,772,127 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 79% 85% 86% 93% n/a 


Writing 94% 83% 85% 93% n/a 


Science 42% 83% 98% 79% n/a 


September 

2012 269

310 Robert Martinez Jr. . Austin, Texas 78702 . Sean Fox, Principal 

Zavala Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 435 388 410 418 411 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 34.00 33.82 32.58 30.50 32.50 

Support: 



Total 47.50 45.32 43.54 38.00 41.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,702,097 $ 2,715,791 $ 2,451,638 $ 2,779,958 $ 2,832,463 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 80% 80% 86% 82% n/a 


Writing 84% 85% 93% 86% n/a 


Science 60% 69% 83% 79% n/a 


September 

2012 270

1900 Bluebonnet . Austin, Texas 78704 . Randall Thomson, Principal 

Zilker Elementary School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 497 520 523 530 548 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 38.01 37.24 36.36 36.00 37.00 

Support: 



Total 52.51 52.10 51.93 45.50 44.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,924,812 $ 2,901,366 $ 2,736,258 $ 2,859,571 $ 2,835,546 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 98% 95% 98% 95% n/a 


Writing 97% 93% 100% 99% n/a 


Science 94% 98% 98% 97% n/a 


September 

2012 271

AISD Special Campuses 

Alternative Learning Center also includes the following: 

Leadership Academy 

Phoenix Academy 

Travis County Day School 

Travis County Juvenile Detention Center 

Austin State Hospital 

Elementary Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP) 

Garza Independence High School 

Rosedale 


September 

2012 272

901 Neal . Austin, Texas 78702 . Jeff Davis, Academy Director 

Alternative Learning Center 

General Fund 



Enrollment 401 344 358 306 276 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 48.00 46.81 50.64 53.00 48.00 

Support: 



Total 67.00 67.81 79.64 80.00 74.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - 6,540 - - - 

Total $ 4,763,720 $ 5,006,437 $ 5,094,697 $ 5,618,249 $ 5,664,041 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading n/a 77% 86% 52% n/a 

Mathematics n/a 67% n/a n/a n/a 





September 

2012 273

4110 Guadalupe . Austin, Texas 78751 . Gloria Williams, Administrator 

Austin State Hospital 

General Fund 



Enrollment 21 15 16 21 21 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 6.00 6.50 5.92 6.00 6.00 

Support: 



Total 9.00 9.50 8.97 9.00 9.00 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 506,167 $ 495,664 $ 518,575 $ 449,906 $ 448,616 

Contracted Services (6200) - - - 308 308 

Supplies & Materials (6300) 4,474 4,277 - 4,816 4,816 

Other Expenses (6400) - - - - - 

Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 510,641 $ 499,941 $ 518,575 $ 455,030 $ 453,740 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 274

906 West Milton Street . Austin, Texas 78704 . La Kesha Drinks, Principal 

Elementary Disciplinary Alternative Education Program 

General Fund 



Enrollment 22 19 20 0 0 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 7.00 7.14 8.23 6.40 3.40 

Support: 



Total 18.75 18.44 19.89 17.40 5.40 



Expenditures 

Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 982,584 $ 1,009,464 $ 997,659 $ 1,105,290 $ 1,108,025 

Contracted Services (6200) 1,488 1,771 1,472 2,800 - 



Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 1,016,100 $ 1,035,594 $ 1,021,739 $ 1,133,801 $ 1,146,293 

Per Student Cost $ 46,186 $ 54,505 $ 51,087 #DIV/0! n/a 

FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 








NOTE: Alternative Learning Center for Elementary Students was remodeled into Elementary Disciplinary Alternative Education Program 

(DAEP). This change was part of the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendation. With no permanent student enrollment, Elementary 

AISD FY2013 OFFICIAL BUDGET PLAN . September 2012 275 

DAEP provides support and services to student, who return to their home school.

1600 Chicon . Austin, Texas 78702 . Linda Webb, Principal 

Garza High School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 245 234 226 181 287 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 22.08 22.36 21.33 20.50 21.00 

Support: 



Total 35.84 33.68 33.90 35.00 32.50 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 2,830,586 $ 2,988,320 $ 2,981,306 $ 3,046,477 $ 3,120,860 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 



Reading 90% 96% 90% n/a n/a 

Mathematics 80% 79% 80% n/a n/a 


Social Studies 98% 100% 98% n/a n/a 

Science 98% 79% 91% n/a n/a 


September 

2012 276

2117 West 49 th Street . Austin, Texas 78756 . Elizabeth Dickey, Principal 

Rosedale School 

General Fund 



Enrollment 120 146 150 287 181 


Staff FTEs 

Professional: 



Teachers 27.76 27.59 19.73 22.00 23.00 

Support: 



Total 75.16 84.38 78.52 66.50 59.00 



Expenditures 





Equipment (6600) - - - - - 

Total $ 3,631,345 $ 3,679,879 $ 4,476,264 $ 3,955,300 $ 4,019,872 


FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 









September 

2012 277



September 

2012 278


General Fund 

Non‐Campus 

Departmental 

Budgets & 

Key 

Performance 

Indicators


General Fund 

Non-campus Departments 

Key Performance Indicators 

Austin ISD has a responsibility to manage taxpayer resources wisely by developing tools and models to 

regularly monitor program effectiveness, and by identifying and implementing fiscal and operational 

efficiencies. As identified as Key Action Step 4.3 in the Austin ISD Strategic Plan, FY2010-FY2015, the 

district is developing a performance management framework. 

KPI’s link non-campus departmental budgets to the Strategic Plan, the annual AISD customer service 

survey, standardized testing results, and other efficiency and effectiveness measurements. They 

establish and monitor expenditures & performance on an annual basis. When operational efficiency 

improves, more resources can be shifted into the classroom. Each non-campus departmental summary 

sheet incorporates business elements and strategic elements: 


The department’s mission is a clear, concise statement of purpose for the entire department. 

General Fund Expenditures 

Includes actual expenditure data for FY2010 and FY2011, the FY2012 Adopted Budget and the FY2013 

Adopted Budget. 

Full Time Equivalents (FTE) / Staffing 

Includes actual FTE data for FY2010 and FY2011, the FY2012 Adopted Budget and the FY2013 Adopted 

Budget. 

Key Services 

Services & initiatives, both internal and external to the district: 

What are you doing? 

Who are you doing it for? 

Why are you doing it? 

Key Performance Indicators 

Strategic Result Goals outline the significant results to be achieved over the next two to three years: 

Specific (Date Certain) 

Results Oriented 

Quantifiable & Measurable 

Informs community as to what to expect from the district 

Customer Service Survey 2012 

The percentages represent the percent responding “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” on the 2012 Austin ISD 

Customer Service Survey. The survey polled AISD principals, central administration administrative and 

classified professional staff (positions interacting most with central staff) on four customer service 

statements: 

Staff are courteous; 

Staff respond in a timely manner; 

The department provides valuable services 

Staff are knowledgeable, well-informed and expert in their areas. 


September 

2012 279

Public Relations and Multicultural Outreach 


Reports to: Chief of Staff 

To proactively meet the communication and outreach needs of our stakeholders and contribute to the district’s mission of 

providing a quality education for all students 


Actual Actual Adopted Adopted 


Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 824,727 $ 954,469 $ 1,193,981 

Contracted Services (6200) $ 125,630 $ 147,700 $ 180,450 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ 13,119 $ 7,392 $ 42,451 

Other Expenses (6400) $ 29,411 $ 44,448 $ 65,478 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total 992,887 1,154,009 1,482,360 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,195,068 

339,800 

36,101 

62,478 

1,633,447 

General Fund Staffing FTE 10.00 12.00 17.00 17.00 

Key Services 

* Build stronger links between schools, families, parents, central administration and the community. 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Increase awareness about the positive impact of reform efforts on schools and improve public perception. 

Improve the frequency and quality of linguistically and culturally effective communication. 

Develop and build awareness of the district’s key messages and brand. 

Partner with key grassroots leaders and organizations from Austin to promote parental engagement. 

Type 

Key Performance Indicator 

Baseline 

Targets 

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Number of AISD web site front 

page views 

Total number of requests for 

translation and interpretation 

services 

14,354,564 14,789,334 15,528,801 

N/A TBD 15% increase 

Customer Service Survey 2012 - Percent responding "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" 

Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 

Staff are knowledgeable, wellinformed, 

and expert in their 

area 

Communication 90% 79% 81% 

Community Engagement 92% 86% 82% 

District Translation 96% 95% 98% 

Multicultural Outreach 94% 87% 84% 

Ombudsman 97% 95% 90% 

82% 

84% 

97% 

86% 

95% 


September 

2012 280


Office of Innovation & Development (IAD) 


The mission of the Office of Innovation and Development is to: 

Reports to: Chief of Staff 

• Invest in Success: Expand collaborative partnerships to increase investment in successful models, address disparities, and 

accelerate change; 

• Streamline Systems & Services: Strengthen AISD’s resource development processes to provide a clear and consistent set 

of support services for district staff and external partners to develop, participate in, and implement innovative initiatives; 

• Share the Impact: Raise the level of local, regional and national understanding of effective practices in education through the 

discussion and sharing of results to district, local, regional and national partners and educators. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 10,196 $ 136,000 $ 386,041 

Contracted Services (6200) $ - $ 5,000 $ 5,000 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ - $ 15,000 $ 15,000 

Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ 5,000 $ 5,000 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

405,072 

80,500 

57,100 

15,400 

- 

Total $ 10,196 $ 161,000 $ 411,041 

$ 

558,072 


Key Services 

* Link partners with innovative educational reform efforts in the schools. 

* Identify and advise staff on funding and strategic partnership opportunities. 

Facilitate the development of successfully funded projects using local and national best-practice development and 

* 

fundraising models. 

* 

Provide support and coaching to all grant managers and administrators to implement, and report on grant activities and 

outcomes. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of projects awarded 

Baseline 

Targets 


62% 47% + 49% + 

Effectiveness 

Number of external strategic 

partners 

26 37 40 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Innovation and Development 89% 82% 81% 

78% 


September 

2012 281


Internal Audit 

Reports to: Board of Trustees 


The mission of the Internal Audit Department is to provide independent and objective appraisals of financial, data processing, 

and other relevant matters within the District in order to assist management and employees in the effective discharge of their 

responsibilities by furnishing them with analyses, appraisals, recommendations, and pertinent comments concerning the 

activities reviewed. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

480,728 

2,000 

5,676 

2,000 

- 

Total $ 491,294 $ 494,909 $ 489,870 

$ 

490,404 


Key Services 

* Reviews and appraise controls and the reliability and integrity of financial, managerial and operating data. 

* Ascertain compliance with the District's policies and procedures. 

* Evaluate asset safeguards and accountability. 

* Evaluate the economy and efficiency with which resources are employed. 

* Review operations or programs to assess whether they are being carried out as planned. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 


Percentage of audit projects 

completed according to planned 

timelines 

Average number of days to 

complete draft report after 

fieldwork complete 

Baseline 

Targets 


94% 96% 98% 

35* 30 25 

* estimate 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Internal Audit** N/A N/A N/A 

** will be included in the 2013 Customer Service Survey 

N/A 


September 

2012 282

English 

Reports to: Chief Academic Officer 


The Austin Independent School District Language Arts Department is committed to develop and support the implementation 

of a rigorous, comprehensive language arts curriculum that is high-quality and challenging and ensures best teaching 

practices and equal access for each and every student. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 861,746 $ 688,345 $ 616,825 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,423,403 

13,020 

27,421 

2,873 

- 

1,466,717 


Key Services 

* Align K-12 curriculum and support teachers in understanding ELA TEKS. 

* Support teachers in implementation of current ELA curriculum. 

* Identify and promote use of aligned instructional resources. 

* Develop model lessons for key standards. 

* Create curriculum-based assessments (benchmarks and SCAs) that align to STAAR indicators. 

* Design and deliver professional development for ELA teachers and reading specialists. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of the units in the 

English/Language Arts CRMs 

that have at least one TEKSaligned 

model lesson or portfolio 

of resources that target high need 

student expectations and/or 

readiness standards 

Baseline 

Targets 


60% 80% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of all E/LA (English) 

benchmark assessment items 

flagged for review by statistical 

analysis 

9% 7% 5% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

English/Language Arts 98% 85% 91% 

88% 


September 

2012 283

Social Studies 



The purpose of the Austin ISD Social Studies Curriculum Department headquartered at Central Administration is to provide 

teachers with the appropriate training, resources, and support that ensures the consistent delivery of rigorous and engaging 

instruction in social studies classrooms so that students acquire the standards-based knowledge and skills necessary for 

academic success as well as the habits of body and mind integral in the development of lifelong learners and productive 

citizens in an increasingly complex and diverse global society. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 670,961 $ 600,977 $ 529,662 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

436,304 

20,300 

18,964 

9,694 

- 

485,262 


Key Services 

* Align K-12 curriculum and support teachers in understanding social studies TEKS. 

* 

* 

* 

Support teachers in implementation of current social studies curriculum. 

Create model lessons for key standards. 

Create curriculum-based assessments that align to STAAR indicators. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of the units in the social 

studies CRMs that have at least 

one TEKS-aligned model lesson 

or portfolio of resources that 

target high need student 

expectations and/or readiness 

standards 

Baseline 

Targets 


73% 90% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of all Social Studies 

benchmark assessment items 

flagged for review by statistical 

analysis 

9% 7% 5% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Social Studies 99% 97% 95% 

96% 


September 

2012 284

Early Childhood 



Austin Independent School District's Department of Early Childhood is committed to provide access to a comprehensive, 

evidence based cohesive program for prekindergarten and kindergarten students that will increase social emotional 

awareness and cultural proficiency and school readiness in young children. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 631,621 $ 519,477 $ 599,314 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

283,914 

9,445 

305,981 

1,283 

- 

600,623 


Key Services 

* 

* 

Provide early childhood support and resources for staff. 

Design and deliver professional development opportunities for pre-K and K teachers. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Number of ineligible children 

enrolled in prekindergarten 

Number of professional 

development courses offered on 

integrating technology in the 

prekindergarten and kindergarten 

classroom 

Number of professional 

development courses offered 

related to social and emotional 

development 

Baseline 

Targets 


11 10 5 

8 10 12 

16 18 20 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Early Childhood 100% 98% 99% 

100% 


September 

2012 285

Dyslexia/504 Program 



The Austin ISD Dyslexia/504 Department is dedicated to ensuring that identified students are able to participate equally with 

their non-disabled peers and that appropriate supports are in place to foster high levels of student success. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 395,513 $ 358,710 $ 359,523 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

289,571 

13,834 

223,804 

2,451 

- 

529,660 


Key Services 

* Provide training and monitoring support on compliance indicators and evaluation procedures based on Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act and the State Dyslexia Handbook. 

* 

Provide guidance on instructional best practices for students with dyslexia within a tiered framework of support. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 


Percentage of students served by 

Section 504 in compliance with 

504 requirements 

Percentage of dyslexia students 

served in compliance with 

Dyslexia requirements 

Baseline 

Targets 


86% 90% 100% 

89% 90% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

504 Dyslexia 96% 89% 91% 

93% 


September 

2012 286

Visual Arts 



The Visual Arts department provides students with the knowledge and skills necessary for cognitive, creative and social 

growth through the development of a rigorous and comprehensive visual art curriculum, and supports arts-rich schools in an 

arts rich district for the benefit of students, teachers, district employees, community arts partners, and community members. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

76,900 

4,114 

11,854 

11,420 

- 

Total $ 119,303 $ 117,366 $ 104,197 

$ 

104,288 


Key Services 

* Develop/write/provide curriculum documents for visual arts. 

* Facilitate district-wide art exhibits/events. 

* Facilitate district-wide staff development/art workshops. 

* Provide support for transportation for student VASE events. 

* Design and deliver professional development. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of current Instructional 

Planning Guides (IPGs) 

transferred to Curriculum Road 

Maps (CRMs) 

Baseline 

Targets 


0% 50% 87% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Visual Arts 97% 88% 97% 

95% 


September 

2012 287

Elementary Music 




The Elementary Music Department provides K - 12 students with the knowledge and skills necessary for cognitive, creative, 

and social growth through the development of a rigorous and comprehensive vocal music curriculum, and supports arts-rich 

schools in an arts rich district for the benefit of students, teachers, district employees, community arts partners, and 

community members. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

104,512 

81,074 

18,375 

30,426 

- 

Total $ 230,230 $ 246,300 $ 233,294 

$ 

234,387 


Key Services 

* Develop/write/provide curriculum documents for elementary music and secondary choral music. 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Assist in hiring and evaluating teachers. 

Provide staff development. 

Facilitate performances for students by the Austin arts community. 

Purchase digital pianos and major choral equipment for campuses. 

Provide transportation to UIL contests, district-wide events, and performances by the Austin arts community. 

Type 

Effectiveness 





Maps (CRMs) 

Baseline 

Targets 


0% 36% 63% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Choir / Elementary Music 96% 87% 96% 

95% 


September 

2012 288


Bilingual / ESL 



Dual Language is an academic program that enhances the development of bilingualism, biculturalism, and biliteracy so that 

students will graduate ready for college, career, and life in a globally competitive economy. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 1,143,257 $ 1,113,952 $ 1,143,423 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,267,068 

39,500 

409,729 

3,718 

- 

Total $ 1,324,797 $ 1,403,164 $ 1,465,638 

$ 

1,720,015 


Key Services 

* Provide and expand the Dual Language program in the District. 

* Design and provide Professional Development and ELPS trainings to Bilingual and ESL teachers. 

* Provide a district curriculum across content areas supporting the academic and language needs of ELLs. 

* Support the ELLs academic plan for the District. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of campuses 

implementing Dual Language with 

a proficient or exemplary rating 

Baseline 

Targets 


24% 50% 85% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of teachers on a TEA 

waiver that are ESL certified by 

the end of the school year 

50% 85% 90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

English Language Learners 97% 82% 84% 

80% 


September 

2012 289

Science & Health Resource Center 



The mission of the Austin ISD Science and Health Resource Center is to work in partnership with schools, parents and the 

community to empower all students to engage in scientific inquiry, think critically and develop scientific literacy. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 704,590 $ 792,405 $ 774,353 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

458,835 

10,600 

285,679 

20,200 

- 

775,314 


Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

Supply campuses with equipment and materials necessary to support science CRMs and instruction. 

Supply campuses with living materials necessary for science instruction. 

Provide a location for science professional development. 

Type 

Efficiency 


Percent of science kits requested 

by elementary schools arriving at 

least one week prior to the 

scheduled applicable lesson 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percentage of time selected 

science equipment available for 

check out spends in middle and 

high school classrooms 

67% 75% 85% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

SHRC* N/A N/A N/A 

* will be included in the 2013 Customer Service Survey 

N/A 


September 

2012 290


Advanced Academics 



Advanced Academic Services provides support for an array of programs including Gifted and Talented, Pre-AP and Advanced 

Placement program, Middle Years Program and International Baccalaureate, academic magnets and college readiness. 

Support is provided in the form of professional development for teachers, counselors, administrators, and parents; 

instructional resources and tools; curriculum documents; and compliance and monitoring of local, state, and national 

requirements. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 637,558 $ 664,139 $ 811,142 * $ 701,759 

Contracted Services (6200) $ 33,717 $ 18,300 $ 5,599 $ 5,100 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ 39,505 $ 73,250 $ 55,170 $ 110,345 

Other Expenses (6400) $ 131,110 $ 76,000 $ 189,785 $ 167,249 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 841,889 $ 831,689 $ 1,061,696 $ 984,453 


* Advanced Placement Summer Institute Training 

Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Develop and publish resources and tools to support advanced academics. 

Design and deliver district and state-mandated professional development. 

Recruit and retain students in advanced academics. 

Provide awareness and support the structures for college readiness. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percent of The Texas State Plan 

for the Education of 

Gifted/Talented Students 

standards met 

Annual increase in number of 

teacher and staff participation in 

GT professional development 

Baseline 

Targets 


38% 50% 63% 

724 800 900 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Advanced Academics 98% 90% 90% 93% 


September 

2012 291


Physical Education 



Austin Independent School District’s Physical Education and Health Departments educate students to become 

lifelong learners of health and wellness by participating in activities that develop behaviors which encourage 

healthy decision-making, appropriate social skills, and lifelong physical fitness in and outside of the educational 

setting. 







Equipment (6600) $ 19,800 $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

148,380 

7,189 

71,450 

1,120 

- 

Total $ 274,375 $ 236,428 $ 223,048 

$ 

228,139 


Note: FTEs Include 5.00 Itinery Adaptive PE Instructors allocated to campuses 

Key Services 

* Provide support for coordinated school health education, family and community involvement, safe and healthy school 

environment, health services, nutrition services, and staff wellness. 

* 

* 

Develop and deliver Brain Breaks and other physical activities. 

Design and deliver professional development for physical education and adapted physical education teachers. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of grades 3-12 

Curriculum Road Maps (CRMs) 

aligned, completed and available 

via Schoolnet 

Baseline 

Targets 


74% 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Annual number of campus 

teacher contacts 

38 50 60 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Physical Education 98% 96% 96% 

98% 


September 

2012 292


World Languages 



The World Languages Department strives to help students become successful, lifelong global communicators in the 21st 

century by delivering and supporting a rigorous curriculum that leads to demonstrated proficiency in a second language and a 

deep awareness and understanding of the culture being studied. 




Contracted Services (6200) $ 18 $ 1,380 $ 1,200 



Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

83,504 

9,200 

39,855 

6,550 

- 

Total $ 77,459 $ 145,648 $ 140,586 

$ 

139,109 


Key Services 

* Develop, implement and evaluate foreign language curriculum. 

* Coordinate and provide professional development for instructional improvement. 

* Collaborate with teachers to promote instructional consistency and a shared vision. 

* Manage the budget and provides resources on effective language instruction. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Percentage of target language 

use in Languages Other Than 

English classrooms 

46% 75% 90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

World Languages 98% 98% 95% 

99% 


September 

2012 293


Response to Intervention 



The Department of Response to Intervention (RtI) supports a rigorous RtI framework inclusive of evidence based culturally and 

linguistically responsive instruction, assessment, and evidence based intervention. The AISD comprehensive Response to 

Intervention Framework supports the goals within the AISD Strategic Plan. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ - $ - $ 91,969 

Contracted Services (6200) $ - $ - $ 3,000 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ - $ - $ 17,000 

Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ - $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

91,969 

3,000 

263,063 

- 

- 

Total $ - $ - $ 111,969 

$ 

358,032 

General Fund Staffing FTE - - 1.00 1.00 

Key Services 

* 

* 

Support a preventative multi-tiered instructional and behavior framework for all learners by improving differentiated 

instruction, interventions, resources, and training. 

Professional development for implementation of the RtI framework. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of TLI vertical team 

grade 3-9 students improving 

from 25th percentile at EOY for 

reading to be determined by the 

Maze Universal Screener in 

AIMSweb 

Baseline 

Targets 


21% 15% 20% 

Effectiveness 

Percent increase in attendance at 

sessions supporting training and 

professional development in the 

use of a universal screener and 

progress monitoring instrument 

grades K-12 for math and reading 

275 50% 60% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Response to Intervention (RTI) 97% 90% 92% 

94% 


September 

2012 294

T 


Performing Arts 



The Performing Arts Department provides K - 12 students with the knowledge and skills necessary for cognitive, creative, and 

social growth through the development of rigorous and comprehensive band, orchestra, theatre and dance curricula, and 

supports arts-rich schools in an arts-rich district for the benefit of students, teachers, district employees, community arts 

partners, and community members. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

166,234 

21,152 

351,439 

218,442 

- 

Total $ 452,612 $ 749,128 $ 727,141 

$ 

757,267 


Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Develop and provide sustained and coordinated professional development. 

Develop/write/provide curriculum that promotes creativity, critical thinking and artistic competencies. 

Provide support and resources for UIL, TMEA, TBA, TODA, TETA, TDEA , and VASE events. 

Build and expand community support for fine arts programs. 

Provide updated educational specs for the new Performing Arts Center and recommendations on the design. 

Type 

Effectiveness 





Maps (CRMs) 

Baseline 

Targets 


0% 27% 63% 

Band, Orchestra, Dance and 

Theatre 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 

94% 85% 98% 



area 

94% 


September 

2012 295

Social and Emotional Learning 



Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) ensures that children and adults are engaged life-long learners who are self-aware, 

caring and connected to others, and responsible in their decision-making. 




Salary & Benefits (6100) $ - $ - $ 

- 

Contracted Services (6200) $ - $ - $ 

- 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ - $ - $ 

- 

Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ - $ 

- 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ 

- 

Total $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

31,855 

- 

- 

- 

- 

31,855 

General Fund Staffing FTE 0.50 

Key Services 

* Develop and publish resources to support social and emotional learning for campus and community. 


* Provide professional coaching support for schools implementing social and emotional learning. 

* Write social and emotional learning curriculum documents. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of SEL schools reporting 

receiving adequate professional 

development and coaching to 

promote SEL development in 

their school 

Baseline 

Targets 


69% 71% 73% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of SEL schools reporting 

receiving adequate materials and 

curricular resources to promote 

SEL development in their school 

72% 74% 76% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Social and Emotional Learning 98% 95% 87% 

93% 


September 

2012 296

Science 



The mission of the Austin ISD Department of Science is to work in partnership with schools, parents and the community to 

empower all students to engage in scientific inquiry, think critically and develop scientific literacy. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,589,893 $ 1,555,831 $ 1,408,647 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

661,369 

73,554 

598,190 

85,936 

- 

1,419,049 


Key Services 

* Align K-12 curriculum and support teachers in understanding science TEKS. 

* Support teachers in implementation of current science curriculum. 

* Create model lessons for key standards. 

* Create curriculum-based assessments that align to STAAR indicators. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of the units in the Science 

CRMs that have at least one 

TEKS-aligned model lesson or 

portfolio of resources that target 

high need student expectations 

and/or readiness standards 

Baseline 

Targets 


72% 90% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of all Science benchmark 

assessment items flagged for 

review by statistical analysis 12% 9% 6% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Science 98% 90% 90% 

88% 


September 

2012 297

Math 



The mission of the Mathematics Curriculum Department is to create a user-friendly curriculum that is horizontally and 

vertically aligned, provides flexible resources for instruction in deep, rigorous mathematics for all students, and tightly aligns 

assessment to the specificity in the curriculum. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,432,657 $ 1,219,150 $ 1,190,305 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

573,496 

86,220 

518,474 

9,000 

- 

1,187,190 


Key Services 

* Align K-12 curriculum and support teachers in understanding revised math TEKS. 

* Support teachers in implementation of current mathematics curriculum. 

* Create model lessons for key standards. 

* Create curriculum-based assessments that align to STAAR indicators. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of the units in the math 

CRMs that have at least one 

TEKS-aligned model lesson or 

portfolio of resources that target 

high need student expectations 

and/or readiness standards 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of all Math benchmark 

assessment items flagged for 

review by statistical analysis 9% 7% 5% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Mathematics 98% 90% 90% 

90% 


September 

2012 298

Special Programs 



The core value in the Division of Special Programs is respect for the individual. Fostering and modeling the development of 

respect for all individuals regardless of race, national origin, creed, language barrier, disability, or other personal attributes is 

the goal of our department. Our mission is for all students to progress academically and intellectually, and graduate prepared 

for personal success and inspired to contribute to society. In addition, it is our vision that in partnership with our community, 

Austin ISD will be recognized for providing each student with a rigorous education. 





Contracted Services (6200) $ - $ 10,000 $ 6,800 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ - $ 15,000 $ 13,200 

Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ 5,000 $ 2,514 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 26,894 $ 159,726 $ 174,791 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

152,461 

6,800 

12,200 

3,514 

- 

174,975 


Key Services 

* Ensure that the program for ELLs is research based; fully designed, supported and monitored. 

* Ensure that the Special Education standards for instruction support differentiation. 

* Provide advanced level and/or differentiated services to gifted students by trained staff. 

* Provide opportunities for students to effectively communicate in a second language. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of campuses 

implementing Dual Language 

with a proficient or exemplary 

rating 

Baseline 

Targets 


24% 50% 85% 

Effectiveness 

Percentage of students with 

disabilities (SWD) served 80% or 

more of their day in general 

education 

59.86% 62.90% 66.00% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Division of Special Programs 95% 85% 84% 

82% 


September 

2012 299

Special Education 



The Department of Special Education exists to support campus implementation of services to students with disabilities 

through educator empowerment and parent partnership by designing and delivering quality instructional and compliance tools. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 1,168,560 

$ 14,400 

$ 44,982 

$ 5,344 

$ - 

Total $ 1,620,540 $ 1,494,675 $ 1,231,577 

$ 

1,233,286 


Key Services 

Design and deliver instructional supports and tools for campus implementation of rigorous instruction to students with 

* disabilities. 

Design and deliver compliance supports and tools for campus compliance with state and federal regulations for students 

* with disabilities. 

* 

Design and deliver support and tools to all campuses for partnering with parents of students with disabilities. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 



disabilities (SWD) served 80% or 

more of their day in general 

education 

Percent of admission, review and 

dismissal (ARD) committee 

meetings with parent in 

attendance 

Baseline 

FY2012 

Targets 

FY2013 FY2014 

59.86% 62.90% 66.00% 

77% 80% 83% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Special Education 96% 86% 93% 

89% 


September 

2012 300

Special Ed Assessment 



The Department of Special Education Assessment exists to design and deliver quality supports to students, educators, 

families and the community for the success of students with disabilities. 





Contracted Services (6200) $ 404 $ 5,902 $ - 


Other Expenses (6400) $ 929 $ 829 $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 731,200 $ 790,429 $ 809,725 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

793,687 

- 

17,648 

- 

- 

811,335 


Key Services 

* Conducts Full and Individual Evaluations and Reevaluations to address areas of suspected disability. 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Collaborates with campus and central office general and special education administrators related to special education 

disability determination. 

Assist in the development of individualized education programs for individuals with special education needs. 

Ensure compliance with federal and state special education laws including Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

(IDEA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

Interpret special education evaluations for teachers, counselors, and other service providers. 

Responsible for the recruitment, selection, assignment, supervision and appraisal of evaluation staff. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Referral rate for African American 

students to special education 12.42% 12.00% 11.60% 

Efficiency 

Percent of ARDs held within 

federal guidelines (Early 

Childhood Transition) 

99.10% 99.50% 100% 

Efficiency 

Percent of children with parental 

consent to evaluate who were 

evaluated within 90 days 

97.70% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

* See Special Education (LOC 841) 


September 

2012 301

Special Education AH/VH 



The Services for Visually Impaired exists to provide services for students with visual impairments, families, and schools to 

promote success in education, careers, independent living, social relationships, and the broader community. 




Salary & Benefits (6100)* $ 1,754,166 $ 1,747,772 $ 1,554,413 



Other Expenses (6400) $ 2,285 $ - $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,760,669 $ 1,752,872 $ 1,624,313 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,680,275 

3,400 

3,900 

- 

- 

1,687,575 


*Salary includes Itinery teachers 15 Occupational Therapist/Physical Therapist and 9 Visually Impaired teachers. 

Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Recruit, interview, train, appraise staff for services for visually impaired. 

Management of office for services for visually impaired and regional day school program for the deaf. 

Maintain budget, purchases and flow through funds for low incidence services. 

Conduct evaluations and direct instruction for students with visual impairments. 

Assign responsibilities and problem solve critical cases. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percent of students with parental 

consent to evaluate who were 

evaluated within 90 days (AI/VI 

only) 

Percentage of itinerant supported 

services for students with AI or VI 

that are implemented as written in 

their IEP 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

100% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

* See Special Education (LOC 841) 


September 

2012 302

CATE 



To provide opportunities for students to acquire 21st century academic and technical skills needed for entry into the global 

workforce and/or postsecondary education in order to become contributing members of their community. 




Salary & Benefits (6100)* $ 18,215 $ 3,588 $ 220,151 


Supplies & Materials (6300) $ 99,502 $ 4,062 $ 1,380,556 


Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 941,982 $ 866,957 $ 2,632,143 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

170,761 

867,781 

1,372,649 

221,562 

- 

2,632,753 

General Fund Staffing FTE - - - - 

*Extra Duty Stipends and Substitutes 

Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Provide oversight for CTE programs. 

Supervise compliance with district, state and federal guidelines. 

Design and deliver professional development for teachers. 

Develop/write/provide curriculum documents for CTE courses. 

Provide curriculum support to CTE teachers. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent change in the number of 

students attaining industry 

certification or licensure 

Baseline 

Targets 

FY2012 FY2013 FY2013 

118% 10% 5% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of students eligible for 

college credit through articulated 

CTE courses 

26% 28% 30% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Career and Technology (CTE) 98% 95% 98% 

96% 


September 

2012 303

Library Media Center 



The mission of the AISD Library Media Center is to provide resources and access to information and media-related 

services for AISD staff, to support professional development and best practices initiatives; and to provide technical and 

technology support for campus libraries and thus assist librarians in nurturing a life-long appreciation of reading and 

learning by assuring that students and staff have opportunities for successful access, evaluation and use of information 

and libraries. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ 1,272 $ 2,000 $ 676 

Equipment (6600) $ 6,608 $ 7,235 $ 7,235 

Total $ 1,475,396 $ 1,379,812 $ 1,377,879 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

964,947 

158,366 

286,000 

1,500 

7,235 

1,418,048 


Key Services 

* Provide leadership, staff development, support and monitoring of AISD library program. 

* Supervise maintenance of automation software/hardware. 

* Promote instruction in technology skills and use of online resources. 

* Acquire, circulate, and promote professional collection of information resources for AISD staff. 

* Supervise bid process for materials/equipment. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Effectiveness 


Percent of time library 

automated library system is 

available 

Percent of librarians whose 

EOY reports reflect purchases 

to address deficiencies 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

99% 96%-99% 97%-100% 

Effectiveness 

Number of campuses hosting 

summer reading programs 

35 38 41 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Educational, and Information 

Technology (Libraries) 

99% 98% 99% 

99% 


September 

2012 304





Austin Independent School District’s Physical Education and Health Departments educate students to become 

lifelong learners of health and wellness by participating in activities that develop behaviors which encourage 

healthy decision-making, appropriate social skills, and lifelong physical fitness in and outside of the educational 

setting. 




Contracted Services (6200) $ 4,540,453 $ 5,218,423 $ 5,353,476 


Other Expenses (6400) $ 2,662 $ - $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

510,774 

5,525,576 

68,000 

- 

- 

Total $ 5,057,607 $ 5,768,520 $ 5,901,065 

$ 

6,104,350 


Key Services 

Support for coordinated school health education, family and community involvement, safe and healthy school environment, 

* 

health services, nutrition services, and staff wellness. 

Identify homeless, mobile, pregnant, and other students with special needs and ensure they receive consistent access to 

* 

curriculum and appropriate services. 

* Provide comprehensive, aligned, evidence based, rigorous health education. 

* Provide opportunities for staff wellness. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of Science and Health 

Department heads attending 

professional development 

Baseline 

Targets 


80% 85% 90% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of students who access 

school health care for a breathing 

episode, who do not have a care 

plan 

29% 29% 28% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Health Services 98% 94% 94% 

97% 


September 

2012 305


Student Services 

Reports to: Chief Schools Officer 


The primary function of the Office of Student Services/Records is to provide the key services listed below. In addition to 

those services, the Office is responsible for the administration of District trustee, bond and tax ratification elections that are 

held by Travis County Elections. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 506,624 $ 455,349 $ 489,961 $ 490,554 



Other Expenses (6400) $ 1,297 $ 3,347 $ 536 $ 536 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 550,852 $ 524,973 $ 558,146 $ 558,739 


Key Services 

* Manage registration/enrollment and attendance maintenance procedures for the District. 

* Implement the transfer policy. 

Implement all other assignment processes (e.g., NCLB, PEG, Diversity Choice, reassignments due to boundary 

* 

changes, etc. 

* Serve as the records custodian for the District. 

* Provide student projections for the District. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Annual projected total enrollment 

for first six weeks will be within 

one percent of actual enrollment 

for the first six weeks 

Baseline 

Targets 


1.10%

Educational Support Services 



AISD's Learning Support Services Department supports the Dropout Prevention Specialists' (DPS) efforts. DPSs work 

with campus principals and staff to promote positive school attendance, identify truant students early and create effective 

intervention strategies to increase attendance and high school graduation. They are key members of the Child Study 

System Teams. Through Child Study System Team meetings DPS work with campus staff to make data driven decisions 

about students with attendance issues and help to establish effective interventions. DPS also work directly with students 

and parents to increase attendance and high school graduation. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,306,115 $ 1,574,173 $ 607,776 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

220,868 

229,749 

4,381 

8,599 

- 

463,597 


Key Services 

* Campus DPS provide parent training regarding compulsory attendance laws. 

* Campus DPS connect high school dropouts to alternative education programs as needed. 

Campus DPS serve on Child Study Systems Teams and assist in creating effective interventions. 

* Maintain updated list of AISD alternative education programs and provide staff development for DPS. 

* Create systematic best practice systems to increase attendance & graduation rates and reduce leaver rates. 

Provide systematic best practice training for DPS, attendance specialists and designated administrators. 

* 

Type 

Effectiveness 



District DPS eCST record within 

10 working days of reaching 10 

unexcused day absences 

Baseline 

Targets 


10% 30% 65% 

Effectiveness 


District DPS eCST record within 

10 working days of campus 

initiated administrative withdrawal 

22% 30% 65% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 

Staff are knowledgeable, 

well-informed, and expert 

in their area 

Educational Support 

N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Services* 



September 

2012 307

Delta / NovaNet 



The Department of School, Family and Community Education will provide a broad array of comprehensive educational 

programs and services that will complement and best address the academic and support service needs of AISD students 

through the use of a collaborative, shared partnership with families and community members to ensure the schooling success 

of all learners. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 662,428 $ 689,514 $ 707,798 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

265,168 

4,200 

475,482 

1,385 

- 

746,235 


Key Services 

* Provide a self-paced alternative instructional option for high school students for credit recovery and accrual. 

* Offer home-based instructional option for teen parents unable to attend traditional school. 

* Create an open-entry/open-exit instructional environment for students in grades 9-12. 

* Provide on-line AP/Dual Credit option for high school students at no cost. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percentage of high school 

DELTA teachers trained to use 

curriculum, curriculum updates, 

and data systems provided 

through the Pearson NovaNet 

system 

Annual percentage increase in 

the number of graduates in 

DELTA 

Baseline 

Targets 


96% 97% 98% 

1.75% 2% 2% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

DELTA* N/A N/A N/A N/A 



September 

2012 308

Guidance & Counseling 



The mission of the AISD School Counselors is to implement a comprehensive developmental guidance and 

counseling program promoting success for all students through a focus on academic achievement, prevention and 

intervention activities, advocacy, and social/emotional and career development. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 469,080 $ 544,210 $ 284,768 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

86,278 

89,725 

274,000 

5,000 

- 

455,003 


Key Services 


* Design and deliver classroom guidance presentations. 

* Provide individual and group counseling. 

* Provide support for individual college and career planning. 

Type 

Efficiency 


Percent of CTE high school 

students taking a coherent 

course sequence who have a 

4-yr plan 

Baseline 

Targets 

FY2012 FY2013 FY2013 

33% 60% 75% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of 5th grade students 

completing an Individual 

Academic Career Plan unit 

43% 50% 65% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 

Staff are knowledgeable, 

well-informed, and expert in 

their area 

Guidance, Counseling & 

Student Intervention 

99% 96% 97% 

95% 


September 

2012 309


Learning Support Services 



Learning Support Services provides support to campuses and students through the child study teams in: social work, 

professional development, defining academic/behavior and attendance interventions and the development and enhancement 

of the advanced case management system eCST. This system provides progress monitoring, an early warning system for 

students who are starting to struggle, service tracking of all support received, and a case management system for students 

receiving wrap-around support. 



Salary & Benefits (6100)* $ 1,332,521 $ 1,592,516 $ 1,020,294 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,021,658 

814,762 

20,291 

5,102 

- 

Total $ 2,165,179 $ 2,517,483 $ 1,860,449 

$ 

1,861,813 


*FTEs include 22 AAFR discipline positions of which salaries will be charged to campuses 

Key Services 

* Support district-wide system of campus Child Study Teams. 


* Provide social work services for students and families. 

* Coordinate services with community agencies. 

* Provide support for critical incidents. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of eCST eligible users 

who have at least one entry using 

service tracking 

Baseline 

Targets 


33% 60% 80% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of goals in eCST that are 

measureable and appropriate 19% 25% 50% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Learning Support Services 94% 96% 94% 

93% 


September 

2012 310





Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 274,349 $ 400,056 $ 476,589 $ 1,802,283 * 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 551,237 $ 630,803 $ 666,773 $ 2,160,108 


* Extra Duty funds to be disbursed to campuses. 

Key Services 

* Increase college applications and acceptances of AISD students, particularly first-generation college goers. 

* 

* 

* 

* 

AVID-College Readiness 


The Austin ISD AVID Department works in the Austin schools to close the achievement gap in our community by increasing 

college readiness among all students and by preparing all students for success in a global society. 

Ensure high-quality, rigorous instruction in critical reading, writing, note-taking and organizational skills, as well as 

career/college exploration, time management, leadership, and personal responsibility. 

Provide tutors to work with students in small groups in the AVID class to build academic success in core classes. 

Provide ongoing training, coaching, and support to AVID schools and teachers. 

Fund AVID site licenses, working with schools to ensure compliance with AVID standards and qualification for AVID 

Certified status each year. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percent of AVID campuses that 

are annually certified 

Percent of AVID students who 

have stayed in the AVID program 

(year- to-year) 

Percent of AVID Seniors 

accepted to a 4-year 

college/university 

Baseline 

Targets 


83% 90% 95% 

71% 75% 80% 

81% 85% 95% 

Effectiveness 

The percent of AVID 8th graders 

enrolled in Algebra I 28% 35% 40% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

AVID* N/A N/A N/A 


N/A 


September 

2012 311

School Turnaround Initiative 



To collectively build a robust portfolio of high performing turnaround schools to rapidly accelerate student 

achievement as part of the District's overall education plan for all students, especially the District's most 

chronically under-performing schools. 




Salary & Benefits (6100) $ - $ 1,624,911 * $ 1,314,503 

Contracted Services (6200) $ - $ 294,507 $ - 

Supplies & Materials (6300) $ - $ - $ 4,000 

Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ - $ 4,000 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ - $ 1,919,418 $ 1,322,503 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

259,846 

300,000 

46,466 

4,000 

- 

610,312 

General Fund Staffing FTE 1.50 2.00 2.00 

*Extra Duty Salary for high dosage tutoring 

Key Services 

* Provide support to and assist with development of vertically-aligned signature programs. 

Research programs and school models that address critical district needs and/or address needs of schools 

* 

struggling to meet state and federal accountability standards. 

Coordinate and facilitate implementation of approved programs and school models (e.g., high dosage 

* 

tutoring (HDT) at eight schools and signature program support for three vertical teams). 

* 

Convene internal and external work groups to assist with program development, implementation and 

evaluation. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Percent of 3rd gr. students 

performing on grade level in reading 

Effectiveness for campuses supported by HDT 34% 50.5% 62.9% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of 6th gr. students 

performing on grade level Math 

(AIMSWeb-CAP) for non-TTIPS 

campuses supported by HDT 

44% 58.0% 68.5% 


Effectiveness 

performing on grade level Math 

(AIMSWeb-COMP) for non-TTIPS 

41% 55.7% 77.8% 

campuses supported by HDT 

Effectiveness 


performing on grade level in Algebra 

I for non-TTIPS campuses 

supported by HDT 

73% 79.7% 84.7% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

School Turnaround* N/A N/A N/A 


N/A 


September 

2012 312


Athletics 



The Department of Athletics provides a rigorous athletic program to AISD Middle Schools and High Schools which complements 

and supports a challenging academic program by teaching students to persevere, to work well with others, and to test 

themselves. 




Contracted Services (6200) $ 1,067,180 $ 900,686 $ 858,050 $ 1,012,373 



Equipment (6600) $ 129,153 $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 4,949,050 $ 4,433,178 $ 4,098,560 

$ 

4,096,495 


Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Organize and Supervise educationally sound athletic programs. 

Inspire students to become productive citizens, successful students and effective leaders. 

Provide a safe and healthy environment for all athletic related activities. 

Contract, supervise and secure central athletic facilities when rented by non-district, non-profit organizations. 

Supervise, staff, secure and account for AISD athletic competitions held at central facilities. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of middle school students 

participating in Athletics 

Baseline 

Targets 


60.0% 63.2% 64.3% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of high school students 

participating in Athletics 

40.0% 41.2% 42.3% 

Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

Percent of coaches current on 

first aid, CPR/AED, and 

concussion training 

Amount of funds used for game 

help expenses at competitions 

held at central facilities 

100% 100% 100% 

$628,901 < $864,270 < $846,450 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 


and expert in their area 

Department of Athletics 96% 95% 98% 

98% 


September 

2012 313

School, Family & Community Education 



The Department of School, Family and Community Education will provide a broad array of comprehensive educational 

programs and services that will complement and best address the academic and support services needs of AISD students 

through the use of a collaborative, shared partnership with families and community members to ensure the schooling 

success of all learners. 




Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 1,246,839 $ 1,166,744 $ 984,032 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,421,534 $ 1,395,493 $ 1,942,576 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

1,764,210 

964,318 

49,063 

16,921 

- 

2,794,512 


Key Services 

* Provide oversight for community use of district facilities. 

* Create learning opportunities for families to be more actively engaged in learning at school/home/community. 

* Provide child care service to increase holding power of teen parents. 

* Maintain partnerships with organizations to provide support services for students. 

* Offer educational options for students to meet promotion/graduation standards. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Efficiency 

Effectiveness 

Annual revenue from grants and 

facility use fees 

Number of students participating 

in programs designed to meet 

grade promotion and graduation 

standards 

$8,522,297 $8.6M $8.6M 

18,792 18,792 18,792 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

School, Family & Community 

Education 

93% 88% 94% 

91% 


September 

2012 314

Associate Superintendent-High Schools 



The mission of the Office of High Schools is to provide leadership in all aspects of operations for all high school Principals, 

Assistant Principals, and staff in order to provide a rigorous and well rounded educational experience for Austin ISD's high 

school students and families ensuring that all students graduate and are ready to excel in college and career. 





Contracted Services (6200) $ 260,560 $ 359,135 $ 358,631 $ 1,475,913 * 



Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

27,150 

1,120 

- 

Total $ 805,456 $ 1,020,539 $ 1,062,343 

$ 

2,273,650 


*Early College funds to be allocated to campuses 

Key Services 

* 

* 

Lead administrative teams at all campuses in the development and delivery of curricular and academic goals. 

Lead the staff selection and capacity building of Principals, Assistant Principals, and instructional leaders. 

* 

* 

* 

Provide effective instructional tools for the implementation of programs and strategies to support high quality instruction. 

Monitor the performance and progress of student performance, discipline, campus budgets, and staff. 

Provide strong and effective interventions and adjustments based on data-informed decisions. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Graduation rate 

80% 

(Class of 10-11) 

85% 


87% 


Effectiveness 

Percent of instructional 

leadership professional 

development participants who 

indicate that the professional 

development delivered was of 

high quality 

91% 93% 95% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of AISD high school 

campuses rated Academically 

Acceptable or better 

N/A 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Office of High Schools 95% 90% 94% 

95% 


September 

2012 315

Associate Superintendent - Area 1 



The Area 1 Schools Office monitors student achievement at the 36 Area 1 campuses to ensure that all students are 

performing at or above grade level and that all schools will meet or exceed state and federal accountability standards. The 

Office develops and strengthens leadership capacity in campus principals in order to ensure students receive an educational 

experience that is academically rigorous, culturally relevant, and healthful so that they are well-prepared for college, career, 









Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 473,716 $ 629,748 $ 777,047 

General Fund Staffing FTE 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

654,747 

4,000 

25,772 

1,500 

- 

686,019 

Key Services 3.00 4.00 7.20 7.20 

* 

* 

* 

Systemically monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the written curriculum. 

Assist in developing an action plan inclusive of both core instruction and interventions in response to student achievement 

data. 

Provide job-embedded professional development support to principals and leadership teams to ensure effective delivery of 

instruction. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percent of Area 1 elementary 

school campuses rated 

Academically Acceptable or 

better 

Percent of Area 1 middle school 



Baseline 

Targets 


N/A 100% 100% 

N/A 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of Area 1 K-2 students 

reading on or above grade level 

on district reading assessment 

(DRA) 

79% 85% 

90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Office of Schools – Area 1 90% 92% 93% 

92% 


September 

2012 316





The Area 2 Schools Office monitors student achievement at the 34 Area 2 campuses to ensure that all students are 

performing at or above grade level and that all schools will meet or exceed state and federal accountability standards. The 

Office develops and strengthens leadership capacity in campus principals in order to ensure students receive an educational 

experience that is academically rigorous, culturally relevant, and healthful so that they are well-prepared for college, career, 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

376,868 

7,400 

26,281 

1,401 

- 

Total $ 271,943 $ 231,435 $ 411,810 

$ 

411,950 


Key Services 

* Systematically monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the written curriculum. 

Assist in developing an action plan inclusive of both instruction and interventions in response to student achievement data 

* as it becomes available. 

Provide job-embedded professional development support to principals and leadership teams to ensure effective delivery of 

* instruction. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 



Academically Acceptable or 

better 




N/A 100% 100% 

N/A 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 


reading on or above grade level 

on district reading assessment 

(DRA) 

73% 85% 

90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Office of Schools – Area 2 88% 91% 93% 

92% 


September 

2012 317





The Area 3 Schools Office monitors student achievement at the 29 Area 3 campuses to ensure that all students 

are performing at or above grade level and that all schools will meet or exceed state and federal accountability 

standards. The Office develops and strengthens leadership capacity in campus principals in order to ensure 

students receive an educational experience that is academically rigorous, culturally relevant, and healthful so that 

they are well-prepared for college, career, and life in a globally competitive economy. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 741,792 $ 1,976,155 * $ 2,068,236 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ 

- 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

2,110,620 

136,000 

851,218 

7,964 

- 

Total $ 1,068,589 $ 2,807,892 $ 2,735,309 

$ 

3,105,802 


*Salary includes Extra Duty Middle School Programs (Read/Math Initiative, Struggling Learners) 

Key Services 

* Systematically monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of the written curriculum. 

* 

* 

Assist in developing an action plan inclusive of both instruction and interventions in response to student 

achievement data as it becomes available. 

Provide job-embedded professional development support to principals and leadership teams to ensure 

effective delivery of instruction. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 




Academically Acceptable or better 




Baseline 

Targets 


N/A 100% 100% 

N/A 100% 100% 


Effectiveness 

reading on or above grade level on 

district reading assessment 

71% 85% 90% 

(DRA) 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Office of Schools - 

Area 3* 

N/A N/A N/A 

* Office did not exist at time of 2012 survey. Will be included in the 2013 Customer Service Survey 

N/A 


September 

2012 318


Accountability and Assessment 


Reports to: Chief Performance Officer 

The Office of Accountability and Assessment is responsible for all aspects of state data reporting compliance (PEIMS) as well 

as the administration of the district formative assessment program. The Office oversees the production, collection and 

maintenance of the related data elements and provides timely and accurate data products to campuses, district leadership 

and the state. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

725,647 

55,117 

10,979 

2,359 

- 

Total $ 723,502 $ 900,771 $ 893,802 

$ 

794,102 


Key Services 

* Administer 415 district-level short cycle, benchmark and modified assessments per year. 

* Prepare and submit 8 PEIMS submissions to TEA per year. 

* Prepare and submit 36 PET submissions to TEA per year. 

Extract, analyze and interpret campus level student data including demographic, enrollment, graduation, dropout, 

* 

assessment, attendance, academic achievement, etc. Develop and distribute related reports. 

* Provide leadership in the implementation and development of district data systems. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of state reporting 

deadlines met 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of ad hoc data requests 

fulfilled by deadline 

100% 98% - 100% 98% - 100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of formative assessment 

deadlines met 

90% 93% 95% 

Efficiency 

Number of PEIMS data entry and 

assessment scanning errors 

4211 3579 3042 

Efficiency 

Percent of benchmark and short 

cycle assessments that are 

administered online 

1.38% 1.52% 1.67% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Accountability and Assessment 96% 98% 98% 

97% 


September 

2012 319


Campus/District Accountability 



Provide campus and district leaders with student performance data to gauge progress, inform good decision making, and 

target assistance for students, teachers and schools. Oversee and support district advisory bodies. Develop tools and 

procedures to monitor the implementation of the Strategic Plan. 






Other Expenses (6400) $ 312 $ 6,079 $ 1,014 $ 6,000 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 368,319 $ 363,898 $ 402,429 

$ 

413,653 


Key Services 

* 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Communicate with campus & district staff regarding state and federal accountability rules and requirements. 

Develop and maintain district's Strategic Plan. 

Provide an array of presentations and reports on campus and district performance measures and respond to ad hoc data 

requests. 

Provide oversight and support of district advisory bodies. 

Provide district wide support in the development of departmental plans, missions, goals and KPIs. 

Type 

Efficiency 


Percent of all state and federal 

statutory and regulatory 

accountability deadlines met 

Baseline 

Targets 


100% 100% 100% 

Efficiency 

Effectiveness 

Percent of data presentation 

deadlines met 

Percent of district advisory 

bodies with complete bylaws, 

charters, and websites 

100% 100% 100% 

100% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Campus & District 

Accountability 

100% 99% 100% 

99% 


September 

2012 320

Research and Evaluation 



Support positive outcomes for Austin ISD students by providing user-friendly information that is relevant, timely, and concise 

that district staff and stakeholders at every level use to make critical programmatic decisions. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 759,405 $ 835,144 $ 807,166 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

802,129 

35,240 

112,181 

3,616 

- 

953,166 


Key Services 

* Provide formative feedback to program staff. 

* Support compliance reporting for grant funded programs. 

* Design, develop and deliver summative reports on program effectiveness. 

* Conduct districtwide surveys of students, parents, and staff. 

* Coordinate of District External Research Process. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 


Percent of evaluation publication 

deadlines met 

Percent of compliance reporting 

deadlines met 

Baseline 

Targets 


80% 82% 90% 

100% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Research and Evaluation 98% 97% 95% 

98% 


September 

2012 321

System Wide Testing 



System Wide Testing will work closely with campus personnel to provide training and support for student academic 

performance measurement and placement with a primary goal of ensuring integrity in the administration of all system-wide 

testing programs while complying with both state and federal regulations and guidelines. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 823,336 $ 868,734 $ 861,365 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

996,589 

39,750 

126,995 

3,170 

- 

1,166,504 


Extra duty pay increase for end of course testing and TAKS testing 

Key Services 

* Provide technical assistance to district staff on system-wide testing issues. 

* Ensure state-mandated assessment program is implemented appropriately within Austin ISD. 

* Support the entire Accountability Department with other testing efforts as needed. 

* Ensure federal assessment programs like NAEP are implemented appropriately within Austin ISD. 

* Support other testing efforts within the district and provide technical assistance on a variety of testing issues. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Percent of Campus Testing 

Coordinators (CTC) trained 100% 100% 100% 

Effectiveness 

Ratio of test administrators to 

students 

30:1 30:1 30:1 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Systemwide Testing 99% 99% 98% 

98% 


September 

2012 322

Human Resources 


Reports to: Chief Human Capital Officer 

In partnership with District schools and offices, the Office of Human Resources exists to recruit, support, and retain a talented, 

high quality, and diverse workforce. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 4,530,397 $ 5,004,772 $ 4,895,584 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

4,192,132 

383,832 

148,979 

215,411 

- 

4,940,354 


Key Services 

* Recruit and staff all positions - professional, administrative, and classified. 

* Develop, implement, and monitor the District's compensation program. 

* Develop, implement, and monitor the District's leave policy. 

* Oversee all employee relations functions. 

* Oversee the evaluation process for all employees. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Number of teaching vacancies on 

the first day of school 

Percent of principal positions 

staffed by the beginning of the 

school year 

Percent of grievances resolved 

prior to reaching Level IV 

Rank as a top paying district in 

Central Texas (FICA excluded) 

Baseline 

Targets 


6 0-5 0-5 

100% 100% 100% 

97% 95%-97% 95%-98% 

7 of 10 5 of 10 3 of 10 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Human Resource Staffing 96% 93% 97% 

93% 

Human Resource Services 96% 93% 97% 

95% 

Employee Relations 99% 97% 99% 

99% 


September 

2012 323

Management Info System 



The Office of Technology is committed to a new digital learning environment that embraces 21st Century learning standards, 

assessment and accountability to positively transform learning and teaching for all students and teachers at AISD. 






Supplies & Materials (6300) $ 1,699,116 $ 1,299,548 $ 1,466,200 


Equipment (6600) $ 28,571 $ 10,000 $ 25,000 

Total $ 6,763,281 $ 6,629,555 $ 6,730,561 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

4,728,294 

504,800 

1,466,200 

10,140 

25,000 

6,734,434 


Key Services 

* System Integration and Data Warehouse 

* Student Information System, Financial Systems, HR Systems 

* System Development, Web and Portal Development 

* Security Management, Identity Mgmt, Access, Network, Servers, Wireless, Storage, Internet 

* Filtering, Intrusion Detection, Antivirus, Business Continuity, Backup & Disaster Recovery 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 


Percent of service requests 

resolved within the service level 

agreement (IFAS) 



agreement (TEAMS) 

System Availability: Wireless 

System Availability: Network 

Baseline 

Targets 


68% 85% 90% 

89% 85% 90% 

100% 100% 100% 

100% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Business Systems 93% 90% 96% 

89% 

Student Information Systems 99% 95% 98% 

95% 

MIS 99% 97% 100% 

98% 


September 

2012 324

Information System Admin 












Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,417,476 $ 1,332,494 $ 1,177,681 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

858,661 

89,901 

225,426 

4,534 

- 

1,178,522 


Key Services 

* Technology Leadership, Strategy, Planning, Bond Project Management 

* Standards and Compliance, Licensing & Audits , Purchasing and Product Acquisition Standards 

* Software and Hardware Standards, Software and Hardware Inventory Management 

* Teacher Laptops, Regulatory Compliance 

* Datashare Agreements & Contracts, Help Desk 

Type 

Effectiveness 




agreement (Help Desk) 

Baseline 

Targets 


96% 85% 90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Help Desk 98% 95% 98% 

96% 


September 

2012 325

Technology Customer Support 









Contracted Services (6200) $ 3,043,432 $ 2,991,360 $ 2,922,865 



Equipment (6600) $ 231,037 $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

2,922,865 

1,537,451 

9,126 

- 

Total $ 8,468,728 $ 7,972,477 $ 8,601,307 

$ 

8,407,879 


Key Services 

* Help Desk & Enterprise SLA’s 

* User Security Management, E-mail System, Web Content Support 

* Telecommunications, Desktop Support and management, Desktop Engineering 

* Instructional and Campus Support, Customer Communications 

* Systems Training and Professional Development 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 




agreement (Desktop Support) 



agreement (Telecom) 



agreement (Servers) 

Baseline 

Targets 


70% 85% 90% 

65% 85% 90% 

93% 85% 90% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Desktop Support 99% 94% 99% 

98% 

Desktop Engineering 99% 97% 99% 

99% 

Enterprise Services 99% 96% 98% 

98% 

Telecommunications 98% 95% 98% 

97% 

WAN 95% 96% 99% 

98% 

Servers 98% 96% 98% 

99% 

Network Security 98% 96% 100% 

98% 


September 

2012 326


Educator Quality 



The Office of Educator Quality positively impacts and supports the recruitment, development, retention, and placement of 

effective teachers and administrators throughout Austin ISD. 



Salary & Benefits (6100) $ 185,829 $ 2,614,470 $ 2,571,193 




Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

2,465,158 

173,945 

230,425 

120,584 

- 

Total $ 189,952 $ 3,340,845 $ 3,017,063 

$ 

2,990,112 


Key Services 

* Induction of novice teachers and administrators. 

* Provide ongoing professional development opportunities for AISD staff. 

* Provide targeted supports and rewards through strategic compensation (REACH) program. 

* Provide leadership pathways and training for teacher leaders and aspiring administrators. 

* Support a comprehensive approach to cultural proficiency and inclusiveness. 

Type 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 

Effectiveness 


Percent of newly hired 

teachers and administrators 

who participate in the district 

onboarding process within 1 

month of hiring date 

Percent of teachers and 

administrators with a 

professional learning plan 

Teacher retention rate (East 

Austin Schools) 

Baseline 

Targets 


90% 92% 94% 

0% 0% 25% 

71.7% 78% 85% 

Percent of district administrator 

vacancies filled with internal 

candidates 90% 92% 95% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Professional Development 93% 88% 84% 

83% 

Leadership Development 96% 94% 85% 

86% 

Strategic 

Compensation/REACH 

98% 95% 87% 

92% 


September 

2012 327


Transportation Office 


Reports to: Chief Operations Officer 

The mission of AISD Transportation is to provide safe, reliable and professional service for our students according to the 

parameters set forth by the District's policy, and in adherence to applicable State and Federal laws. 






Other Expenses (6400) $ (973,642) $ (761,000) $ (848,980) 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 22,147,632 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

210,991 

4,117,600 

(883,480) 

- 

Total $ 24,408,401 $ 23,666,723 $ 23,410,167 

$ 

25,592,743 


Key Services 

* AISD Transportation transports 22,000 students daily on 512 buses, traveling 7.2 million miles a year. 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Services include regular, special education, cross town busing, pre-k centers, after school, tutorials, NCLB and bilingual 

routes. 

AISD Transportation provides about 8,000 field trips and athletic trips per year. 

80% of the Buses are equipped with a GPS and digital camera system for additional safety and efficiency. 

AISD is the proud owner of the first plug in hybrid bus in Texas and piloting 6 propane buses. The average age of the fleet 

is 5.4 years. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Efficiency Percent of on-time arrivals 98% 96-97% 96-98% 

Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

Percent of driver staff current on 

all training, screening, and 

required certifications 

Average number of buses used 

per 100 students 

100% 100% 100% 

0.56 0.57 0.57 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Transportation 95% 95% 99% 

94% 


September 

2012 328

Financial Services 


Reports to: Chief Financial Officer 

It is the goal of the Finance Department to provide the highest quality financial information and services in an accurate, friendly 

and timely manner, to safeguard the finances of AISD in such a manner as to help enhance the education of our students. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ 1,608,302 $ 1,773,934 $ 1,678,904 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

2,679,804 

342,497 

41,050 

1,666,285 

- 

Total $ 4,569,149 $ 4,804,247 $ 4,725,811 

$ 

4,729,636 


Key Services 

* Pay all district employees and vendors accurately and timely. 

* Administer all employee benefit programs and treasury investment functions. 

* Monitor and maintain the district's general ledger. 

* Prepare financial monitoring reports for local, state and federal entities as well as the public. 

* Provide financial analysis on demand for district administrators and public information requests. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Efficiency 

Number of days to process a 

vendor payment 

24 27 25 

Efficiency 

Payroll staff to employee ratio 

0.07 0.08 0.08 

Efficiency 

Percent of grant reports filed by 

deadline 

98% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Department of Financial 

Services 

90% 91% 98% 

96% 

Payroll 94% 94% 98% 

93% 


September 

2012 329


Budget Services 



Budget Services develops, monitors, and reports the district’s annual fiscal budget to employees, parents, and the Austin 

community. Budget Services analyzes and compiles data based on legislative decisions, district administrator feedback, 

mathematical trends, and relevant assumptions in an accurate, timely, transparent, and fiscally responsible manner. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 417,579 $ 484,596 $ 482,629 

$ 

483,173 


Key Services 

* 

Prepare and complete the budget cycle based on pre-established Board of Trustees and TEA legally mandated timelines. 

Prepare, monitor, and provide monthly comparative budget to actual reports to those accountable for expenditure line 

* 

items. 

Create greater financial transparency through community meetings, following established GFOA and ASBO budget 

* 

reporting guidelines, and ensuring budget information is accessible to employees, parents, and the community. 

* Maintain and amend the budget throughout the year as revenue, student populations, and expenditures shift. 

* Provide financial analysis on demand for district administrators and public information requests. 

Type 

Efficiency 


Percent final amended budget GF 

61XX in line with Actual GF 61XX 

Baseline 

Targets 


90% 92% 95% 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 

Percent final amended budget in 

line with actual revenues for fiscal 

year end 

Percent final amended budget 

that is in line with actual 

expenditures for fiscal year end 

95% 96% 96% 

95% 96% 96% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Budget Services 99% 98% 100% 

98% 


September 

2012 330


Contract & Procurement Services 



Contract & Procurement Services exists to support schools, academic departments, and administrative departments to 

provide a comprehensive educational experience by establishing strategic partnerships and administering district-wide 

contracts and purchase orders for equipment, supplies, and services. 







Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,034,032 $ 962,181 $ 893,323 $ 894,405 


Key Services 

* Acquire and maintain an adequate inventory of instructional materials (textbooks) and ancillary supplies. 

* Develop and administer contracts for services and master purchase agreements. 

* Conduct competitive bidding and establish strategic source agreements for equipment, supplies, & services. 

* Maintain an effective Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) community support program. 

* Administer a corporate purchasing card expenditure management program. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 

Efficiency 


Percent of purchase dollars above 

the single quote limit that were 

competitively bid 

Average major procurement 

administrative lead time (PALT) 

(in days) 

Average requisition processing 

lead time (in days) 

Procurement savings/ cost 

avoidance 

Baseline 

Targets 


97% > 95% > 95% 

84 75 60 

3.05 3 3 

1.6% 3% 3% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Purchasing 93% 87% 97% 

92% 


September 

2012 331


Mail Room 



Mail Services provides intra-district mail and package delivery services to all district facilities; receives and delivers U.S. Postal 

Service, Federal Express, and United Parcel Service mail and packages at the Carruth Administration Center; and 

consolidates outgoing U.S. Mail. 






Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 326,682 $ 300,530 $ 295,530 $ 295,805 

General Fund Staffing FTE 

4.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 

Key Services 

* Central receiving of U.S. Mail, FedEx, and UPS packages at the Carruth Administration Center (CAC). 

* Prepare and meter (stamp) outgoing U.S. Mail. 

* Deliver intra-district mail and packages to schools, administrative facilities, and support facilities. 

* Deliver Board Weekly Update and other materials to Board members. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Number of complaints received 

4

Medicaid 



The Medicaid Student Billing Department exists to bill for Special Education Students who are Medicaid Eligible and receive 

School Health and Related Services (SHARS) from AISD Special Education Employees or contracted staff. Our goal is to 

generate revenue dollars to continue to support AISD budgetary needs. 








Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 610,908 $ 302,550 $ 297,081 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

232,722 

55,500 

3,000 

10,600 

- 

301,822 


Key Services 

* Develop a list of AISD Special Education Employees and contracted staff who deliver SHARS Services. 

* File Quarterly Medicaid Administrative Claim (MAC) Report and SHARS Annual Cost Reconciliation. 

* Obtain Parental Consents for Medicaid Eligible Student prior to billing SHARS. 

Bill for Assessment of Special Education Students, Audiological Needs, Nursing Services, Personal Care Services, 

* 

Occupational Therapy, Physical Therapy, Speech Therapy, and Special Transportation. 

* Educate and train AISD Special Education Staff to complete ARD documentation and billing of SHARS. 

Type 

Effectiveness 


Percent of front end federal 

funding expenditures supporting 

the AISD positions in the Random 

Moment Time Study (RMTS) and 

School Health and Related 

Services (SHARS) Cost Pool 

Baseline 

Targets 


13% 13% 10% 

Efficiency 

Number of sessions for all 

School Health and Related 

Services (SHARS) billed in the 

fiscal year. 

267,860 239,000 249,000 

Effectiveness 

Number of schools visited by a 

Medicaid training specialist 

44 66 99 


September 

2012 333

Insurance / Risk Management 



The Risk Management Department maintains and provides insurance coverage to all district employees who sustain an illness 

or injury which arises out of and in the course and scope of their employment. Immediately following the occurrence of a work 

related injury or illness, Risk Management is the point of contact for staff members to obtain forms, file a claim or receive 

answers to questions. Risk Management will file the claim and establish the official relationship between the 

employee/claimant and the insurance company. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ 2,292,785 $ 2,289,893 $ 2,176,000 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 2,594,713 $ 2,606,514 $ 2,524,436 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

136,436 

200,000 

8,500 

2,676,000 

- 

3,020,936 


Key Services 

* Procure and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance coverage and services for all district employees. 

* Ensure the essential forms and instructions for claim filing are available to all employees. 

* File WC claims and provide claimant access to the insurance company. 

* Answer employee questions and assist with concerns in a timely manner. 

* Remain professional and customer friendly at all times. 

Type 

Efficiency 


Annual percentage of worker's 

compensation claims 

Baseline 

Targets 


3.94% 3.62% 3.60% 

Efficiency 

Average cost per incurred 

workers' compensation claim 

$3,485 $3,650 $3,600 

Efficiency 

Average number of approved 

workers' compensation claims per 

month 

47.6 48.1 48 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Employee Benefits 99% 96% 99% 

99% 


September 

2012 334

Printshop 



Print Services exists to support schools, academic departments, and administrative departments to provide a comprehensive 

educational experience by printing quality documents, forms, and materials. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ 1,077 $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 284,784 $ 304,150 $ 296,187 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

194,596 

75,404 

60,000 

- 

- 

330,000 


Key Services 

* Print documents and materials on demand with high quality at the lowest cost. 

* Print forms for student enrollment, school administration, special education, health & safety, etc. 

* Maintain an on-line library of documents that teachers can request to be printed and delivered to their school. 

* Provide document binding services. 

* Reproduce (copy) documents and materials. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

Number of jobs received 

Annual percent increase in 

revenue received from Printshop 

751 788 825 

10% 5% 10% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Print Shop* N/A N/A N/A N/A 



September 

2012 335

State & Federal Compliance & Accountability 



The mission of the Department of State and Federal Accountability is to ensure compliance for all competitive grants, 

donations and foundation funds, federal and state entitlement grants, including all NCLB regulations, monitor all expenditures 

and reporting of those grants, and review and process all grant requests of departments, campuses, and other entities. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ 1,017 $ 829 $ 229 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 282,317 $ 371,675 $ 305,855 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

300,754 

1,330 

6,800 

2,229 

311,113 


Key Services 

* Ensure consistent oversight and management of all external funding. 

* Increase capacity of district to effectively manage and implement externally funded initiatives. 

* 

Maintain compliance for all state, federal rules and regulations, as well as, compliance for are activities required under 

externally funded initiatives. 

Type 


Baseline 

Targets 


Effectiveness 

Percent of Title I, Title II, and Title 

III campus and department 

quarterly reports on expenditures 

of fund balances completed 

100% 98%-100% 99%-100% 

Effectiveness 

Percent of NCLB consolidated 

application campus and 

department grantee key contacts 

that have received at least 5 

visits/contacts per year 

100% 100% 100% 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff 

respond in a 

timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

State & Federal Accountability 92% 87% 96% 

92% 


September 

2012 336

Central Warehouse 



Warehouse Services provides instructional materials (textbooks), classroom supplies, and classroom furniture to students and 

teachers; provides food products and supplies to support food service operations; provides office and custodial supplies to 

support school operations; provides archived records storage; provides moving services; collects and sells surplus property; 

and performs a variety of supportive services as requested. 







Other Expenses (6400) $ - $ - $ - 

Equipment (6600) $ - $ - $ - 

Total $ 1,342,896 $ 1,200,155 $ 832,937 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

648,494 

137,489 

116,000 

1,000 

- 

902,983 


Key Services 

* Central receiving/ storage of frozen/ refrigerated food products, dry food products, and cafeteria supplies. 

* Central receiving, depository, and distribution of instructional materials (textbooks, consumable supplies). 

* Delivery of frozen/ refrigerated food products, dry food products, cafeteria supplies, classroom supplies, paper. 

* Central receiving/ storage of instructional supplies, custodial supplies, classroom furniture, and related items. 

* Other services- textbook audits, moving services, surplus property, archived records storage, and more. 

Type 

Efficiency 

Effectiveness 


Stock turn ratio 

Warehouse stock item fill rate 

Baseline 

Targets 


3.5 3.5 4 

94% 98% 98% 

Efficiency 

Number of stock keeping units 

(SKU) 

1,824 1,800 1,500 


Staff are 

courteous 

Staff respond 

in a timely 

manner 

Department 

provides 

valuable 

services 



area 

Central Warehouse* N/A N/A N/A 


N/A 


September 

2012 337



Detailed Non‐ 

General Fund 

Financial 

Information



Purpose of the Food Service Fund 

The Food Service Fund accounts for the 

operation of the district’s cafeteria meal 

program. The Food Service program includes a 

Food Service Fund expenditure budget of 

$40.1 million and a Food Service Summer 

Program budget of $682,914 for a total of $40.8 

million. 

Revenue 

Revenue to support the Food Service program 

is generated from local, state and federal 

sources. Local sources account for $8.4 million 

or 20.9 percent of the total revenue for Food 

Services. Local sources include earnings from 

investments and fees collected from sales of 

meals to students and staff for breakfast and 

lunch. 

State sources account for $1.1 million or 2.9 

percent of the total revenue for Food Services. 

They include direct financial assistance 

payments from the TEA. 

Federal sources account for $30.7 million or 

76.2 percent of the total revenue for Food 

Services. The National School Lunch Program 

generates $22.3 million or 72.6 percent of the 

federal sources. This program is administered 

by the Texas Department of Agriculture which 

passes monies through the TEA to support the 

school district’s breakfast and lunch programs. 

The Food Service Summer program receives 

funding from the Department of Human 

Services, based on the average number of daily 

participants. This program has a budget of 

$682,914 for both revenue and expenditure 

budgets. 

Expenditures 

For the FY2013 school year, the Food Service 

expenditure budget of $40.8 million exceeds 

the Food Service revenue budget of $40.2 

million by an amount of $582,456. The balance 

of the shortfall will be supported from the Food 

Service reserve funds which will have an 

ending fund balance of approximately $8.2 

million. 

Outlook for FY2013 

Breakfast prices for FY2013 will remain 

constant from the prior four years. Lunch prices 

for FY2013 were increased slightly from $2.15 

to $2.25 for elementary lunch and from $2.30 

to $2.40 for secondary lunch. AISD is aware 

the economic downturn still impacts many 

families in Austin and strives to keep meal 

prices affordable while also maintaining a 

balanced Food Services budget. 

Comparison to Prior Year 

Total Food Services revenue will increase by 

$1 million from the prior year. Local sources of 

revenue are expected to increase by $166,179 

or 2 percent and the state budgeted funding 

levels will remain the same. Federal revenue 

will increase approximately $844,751 million or 

2.8 percent from the FY2013 Adopted Budget. 

To commensurate with revenue, expenditures 

will increase $947,514 or 2.4 percent from the 

prior year adopted budget. 


September 

2012 338

Table 67 



Statement of Revenue and Expenditures for FY2013 with Comparative Data for Prior Years 

FY2009 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 



School Lunches $ 8,052,659 $ 7,771,378 $ 7,602,803 $ 8,148,083 $ 8,314,262 

Earnings from Investments 62,822 14,537 11,024 14,537 14,537 

Other 32,094 42,041 10,610 63,916 63,916 

TOTAL 8,147,575 7,827,956 7,624,437 8,226,536 8,392,715 


State Program Revenue 243,818 251,031 239,679 247,313 247,313 

TRS on Behalf Payment 907,474 812,641 886,245 899,014 899,014 

TOTAL 1,151,292 1,063,672 1,125,924 1,146,327 1,146,327 


School Breakfast Program 5,336,244 5,713,018 6,021,016 5,916,389 6,093,881 

National School Lunch Program 19,507,701 21,029,117 21,607,379 21,628,537 22,277,393 

USDA Donated Commodities 1,164,566 1,226,842 1,211,676 1,226,842 1,245,245 

After School Snack Program 389,982 369,913 245,275 389,982 389,982 

Other Federal Revenues 669,277 - 525,040 669,277 669,277 

TOTAL 27,067,770 28,338,890 29,610,386 29,831,027 30,675,778 

TOTAL REVENUE 

36,366,638 37,230,518 38,360,747 39,203,890 40,214,820 

EXPENDITURES 

Payroll Costs 20,908,710 21,495,300 22,656,907 23,048,398 23,579,101 

Professional & Contracted Srvcs. 588,127 530,923 626,808 1,532,080 1,532,080 

Supplies & Materials 13,663,689 13,954,648 14,658,406 15,185,107 15,601,918 

Other Operating Expenses 9,580 9,914 12,708 21,566 21,566 

Capital Outlay 460,349 351,649 550,892 62,611 62,611 

TOTAL 35,630,455 36,342,434 38,505,721 39,849,762 40,797,276 

NET REVENUE OVER (UNDER) 736,183 888,084 (144,974) (645,872) (582,456) 

OTHER SOURCES/USES 

Other Resources - - - - 

Other Uses - - - - 

TOTAL - - - - - 

NET REVENUE SOURCES OVER (UNDER) 736,183 888,084 (144,974) (645,872) (582,456) 

BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 7,926,595 8,662,778 9,550,862 9,405,888 8,760,016 

ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 8,662,778 $ 9,550,862 $ 9,405,888 $ 8,760,016 $ 8,177,560 



24% 26% 24% 22% 20% 


September 

2012 339

Table 68 



School Breakfast and Lunch Program 

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 

Number of free lunches served 6,630,431 6,961,968 7,197,365 

Number of reduce priced lunches served 798,387 701,948 554,829 

Number of full price lunches served 1,727,434 1,674,505 1,661,788 

Number of A la Carte meal equivalents 1,407,146 1,368,566 1,290,902 

Total number of lunches served 10,563,398 10,706,987 10,704,884 

Average daily free lunches served 37,888 39,783 41,128 

Average daily reduced price lunches served 4,562 4,011 3,170 

Average daily full price lunches served 9,871 9,569 9,496 

Total average daily lunches served 60,362 61,183 61,171 

Number of free breakfasts served 2,980,023 3,116,045 3,276,842 

Number of reduce priced breakfasts served 237,324 202,274 165,092 

Number of full price breakfasts served 201,648 195,167 206,236 

Number of A la Carte meal equivalents 242,153 235,514 222,149 

Total number of breakfasts served 3,661,148 3,749,000 3,870,319 

Average daily free breakfasts served 17,029 17,806 18,725 

Average daily reduced price breakfasts served 1,356 1,156 943 

Average daily full price breakfasts served 1,152 1,115 1,178 

Total average daily breakfasts served 20,921 21,423 22,116 

Number of days breakfast & lunch served 175 175 175 


September 

2012 340


The Debt Service Fund accounts for all bonded debt payments, including principal, interest and fees. 

Major sources of revenues are from local property taxes levied for bonded debt payment purposes. 

Interest earnings contribute a relatively minor source of additional revenue for this fund. As of the 

beginning of FY2013, excluding commercial paper, the district projects an outstanding debt balance of 

$749.6 million. The district is currently planning to convert $100 million in commercial paper to long term 

fixed debt in January 2013. 

The total revenues and other resources for the Debt Service Fund for FY2013 are $102.3 million and total 

expenditures and other uses are $102.7 million. Debt Service revenues are projected to increase 

approximately $6.9 million from the prior year. The district is anticipating an increase of $5.8 million in 

current year property tax revenues as a result of higher appraised property values and an increased 

collection rate. AISD will spend an additional $14.62 million on bond interest, but $7.8 million less in bond 

principal when compared to the prior year. The budget for the FY2013 Debt Service Fund will have a 

deficit of $462,627. A minimum fund balance of $10 million must be maintained in the Debt Service Funds 

to cover required investments associated with the district’s Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZAB) 

program. In FY2013, the I&S tax rate of 0.163 per $100 of assessed property value will remain 

unchanged from FY2012. By law, the district must set its tax rate at a level that will generate enough 

revenue to cover the debt obligations that are authorized by the voters. Debt service revenues are 

expected to increase $6.9 million, or 7.3 percent and expenditures are expected to increase by $6.8 

million or 7.1 percent as compared to the prior year. 

The district has fixed rate bonds for various bond issues - some have call dates, others are non-callable 

bonds. The structure of the bonds are set to compliment the overall structure of the debt service fund to 

keep the Interest and Sinking Fund tax rate as constant as possible. Equipment purchases are amortized 

on a shorter basis to match the useful life. 


September 

2012 341

Table 69 





FY2010 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2011 

Audited 

Actual 

FY2012 

Adopted 



Adopted 


$ Variance 

FY2012 and 


Positive 

(Negative) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Positive 

(Negative) 


Earnings from Investments $ 284,511 $ 307,657 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ - 0.0% 

Penalty & Interest 377,582 412,842 330,000 400,000 70,000 21.2% 

Taxes- Prior Years 372,885 486,876 325,000 425,000 100,000 30.8% 

Taxes-Current Year 74,389,079 87,334,669 94,505,938 100,272,021 5,766,083 6.1% 

Total Revenues from Local Sources 75,424,057 88,542,044 95,360,938 101,297,021 5,936,083 6.2% 


Building America Bond Subsidy - 886,020 - 984,466 984,466 - 

Total Revenues from Federal Sources - 886,020 - 984,466 984,466 - 

TOTAL REVENUE 75,424,057 89,428,064 95,360,938 102,281,487 6,920,549 7.3% 

EXPENDITURES 

Bond Principal 45,112,633 52,617,633 58,697,347 50,898,305 (7,799,042) -13.3% 

Bond Interest 34,671,258 35,122,926 36,148,032 50,770,809 14,622,777 40.5% 

Other Debt Serv Fees 418,768 893,547 1,075,000 1,075,000 - 0.0% 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES 80,202,659 88,634,106 95,920,379 102,744,114 6,823,735 7.1% 

NET REVENUE OVER (UNDER) (4,778,602) 793,958 (559,441) (462,627) 96,814 -17.3% 

OTHER SOURCES 

Premium/Discount on Bonds - - - - - 

Prepaid Interest - - - - - 

Sale of Bonds - - - - - 

Other Uses 112,393 - - - - 

TOTAL OTHER SOURCES 112,393 - - - - - 

NET REVENUE SOURCES OVER (UNDER) (4,666,209) 793,958 (559,441) (462,627) 96,814 -17.3% 

BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 25,271,334 20,605,125 21,399,083 20,839,642 (559,441) -2.6% 

ENDING FUND BALANCE $ 20,605,125 $ 21,399,083 $ 20,839,642 $ 20,377,015 $ (462,627) -2.2% 


Expenditures 

26% 24% 22% 20% 


September 

2012 342

Table 70 


Combined Debt Service Schedule 

Fiscal Year 

Ending 8/31 Principal Interest 

CP Interest 

and Debt 

Service Fund 

Fees 

Total 

2013 $ 47,898,306 $ 46,569,676 $ 1,375,000 $ 95,842,982 

2014 $ 49,203,777 $ 45,117,840 $ 1,375,000 $ 95,696,617 

2015 $ 63,887,347 $ 29,660,007 $ 1,375,000 $ 94,922,354 

2016 $ 66,932,347 $ 26,619,682 $ 1,375,000 $ 94,927,029 

2017 $ 43,072,347 $ 23,454,157 $ 1,375,000 $ 67,901,504 

2018 $ 34,339,300 $ 21,486,772 $ 1,375,000 $ 57,201,072 

2019 $ 25,479,300 $ 20,078,510 $ 1,375,000 $ 46,932,810 

2020 $ 24,094,300 $ 19,009,383 $ 1,375,000 $ 44,478,683 

2021 $ 24,764,838 $ 18,008,297 $ 1,375,000 $ 44,148,135 

2022 $ 25,367,633 $ 16,940,906 $ 1,375,000 $ 43,683,539 

2023 $ 26,402,633 $ 15,834,354 $ 1,375,000 $ 43,611,987 

2024 $ 27,552,633 $ 14,624,953 $ 1,375,000 $ 43,552,586 

2025 $ 27,855,000 $ 13,353,676 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,583,676 

2026 $ 28,850,000 $ 12,204,635 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,429,635 

2027 $ 30,175,000 $ 11,004,444 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,554,444 

2028 $ 31,525,000 $ 9,601,264 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,501,264 

2029 $ 32,945,000 $ 8,124,209 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,444,209 

2030 $ 34,445,000 $ 6,554,299 $ 1,375,000 $ 42,374,299 

2031 $ 29,525,000 $ 4,912,204 $ 1,375,000 $ 35,812,204 

2032 $ 20,995,000 $ 3,496,979 $ 1,375,000 $ 25,866,979 

2033 $ 21,955,000 $ 2,510,405 $ 1,375,000 $ 25,840,405 

2034 $ 16,055,000 $ 1,477,983 $ 1,375,000 $ 18,907,983 

2035 $ 10,170,000 $ 742,711 $ 1,375,000 $ 12,287,711 

2036 $ 6,080,000 $ 304,000 $ 1,375,000 $ 7,759,000 

$ 749,569,761 $ 371,691,349 $ 33,000,000 $ 1,154,261,110 

* The above schedule does not include annual debt service fees. 


September 

2012 343

Millions 

$120 

Table 71 41 


Austin District 

Outstanding Bonded Debts 

Combined Debt Service Timeline 

$100 

$80 

$60 

$40 

$20 

$- 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 

Interest Principal Total 


September 

2012 344

Table 72 


Bonded Debt Facts and Legal Debt Margin 

Bonded Debt Facts 

Total Outstanding Debt (excludes Commercial Paper) 

Final Payment on Bonded Debt 

Ratio of Net Bonded Debt to Taxable Assessed Value 

Net Bonded Debt 8/31/2010 per Student 

Bond Rating 

Authorized but Unissued 

Borrowing Restrictions 

Taxes Due 

Penalties 

Rate and Levy Limitations 

$749,569,757 

$2,036 

$0 

$8,643 

Moodys: Aaa 

S & P: AA+ 

Fitch: AA+ 

$229,308,189 

Ten percent of Assessed Value 

October 1, delinquent after January 31 

Six percent plus 1% per month interest 

No limit for debt service tax rate 

Legal Debt Margin Calculation 

Assessed Value for 2012 $59,110,581,643 

Debt Limit at 10 Percent of Assessed Value 5,911,058,164 

Amount of Debt Applicable to Debt Limit: 

Total Outstanding Bonded Debt $749,569,757 

Less: Net Assets in Debt Service (20,839,642) 

Total Amount of Debt Applicable to Debt Limit 728,730,115 

Legal Debt Margin $6,639,788,279 


September 

2012 345

Debt Service Policy- CCA (Legal) 

Bonds and Bond Taxes 

The Board may obtain funds to construct, acquire, or equip school buildings, to purchase necessary sites, 

to purchase new school buses, or to acquire or refinance property financed under a contract entered 

under the Public Property Finance Act by issuing bonds and assessing annual ad valorem taxes sufficient 

to pay the principal and interest on the bonds as they come due. 

Bond Issues on New Debt 

Before issuing bonds the district must demonstrate to the attorney general that, with respect to the 

proposed issuance, the district has a projected ability to pay the principal of and interest on the proposed 

bonds and all previously issued bonds, other than bonds authorized to be issued at an election held on or 

before April 1, 1991, and issued before September 1, 1992, from a tax at a rate not to exceed $ .50 per 

$100 of valuation. 

Elections 

No bonds shall be issued or taxes levied unless approved by a majority of the qualified voters of the 

district who vote at an election held for such purpose. The election shall be called by Board resolution, 

which shall set the date, polling places, and propositions to be voted on. The election shall be held on a 

uniform election date. 

Propositions 

Each proposition submitted to authorize the issuance of bonds shall include the question of whether the 

Board may levy an ad valorem tax either: 

1. Sufficient, without limits as to rate or amount, to pay the principal of and interest on said bonds; or 

2. Sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on said bonds; provided that the annual aggregate 

bond taxes in the district shall never exceed the rate stated in the proposition. 

Refunding Bonds Authority 

The Board is authorized to refund or refinance all or any part of any of its outstanding bonds and interest 

thereon, payable from ad valorem taxes, by issuing refunding bonds payable from ad valorem taxes in 

accordance with legal requirements for the issuance. 

Authorized Unissued Bonds 

If the district has authorized school bonds for a specific purpose and that purpose has been accomplished 

by other means or has been abandoned and all or a portion of the authorized bonds remains unissued, 

the Board may call an election to determine whether the authorized bonds may be issued or sold for a 

different purpose or purposes specified in the election order. If a majority of those voting at the election 

favor the sale of the unissued bonds, the Board is authorized to issue the bonds and use the proceeds for 

the purpose or purposes stated in the election order. 


September 

2012 346


Appropriations for the Capital Projects Fund are not incorporated into the official FY2013 Adopted 

Budget. The Adopted Budget is reviewed and approved by the Board of Trustees, while the funding for 

capital projects is approved by Austin voters. However, the capital projects have a significant dollar value 

and are an integral part of the district’s operations. 

The Capital Projects Fund generally encompasses projects that are financed through the issuance of 

school building bonds, subject to approval by voters. Some examples of Capital Project Fund 

expenditures include: 

Purchase of sites for school buildings 

Acquisition, construction, renovation, rehabilitation and improvement of school buildings 

Purchase new school buses 

Equipping school buildings (furniture, fixtures, and equipment) 

The Apple at Work Bond Program 

Austin voters in September 2004 gave their overwhelming approval to a five-year, $519.5 million school 

bond program to alleviate overcrowding, keep up with Austin's growth, and improve the quality, safety and 

sustainability of Austin ISD's campuses and facilities. The vast majority of these capital projects have 

been completed. 

In May 2008, Austin voters approved a $343.7 million bond initiative for capital projects which will be 

implemented over a four year period. This voter approval enables the district to increase the Interest and 

Sinking (I&S) tax rate to a maximum of $0.170 per $100 assessed value. The 2011-12 I&S tax rate is 

currently $0.163 per $100 of assessed value. 

The district is contemplating the capital project needs for a new bond program, possibly in 2013. 

Table 73 


2008 Bond Initiative Capital Projects Pie Chart 

$82,000,000 

23.9% 

Special 

Programs and 

Expansion 

Health, Safety, 

Environment, 

Critical 

Renovations, 

and Other 


Relief for 

Overcrowding, 

Growth and 

Support for 

Academic 

Achievement 

$187,797,315 

54.6% 

$73,920,504 

21.5% 


September 

2012 347

Table 74 


2008 Bond Proposition Detail 

Proposition 1 – Relief for Overcrowding/Growth and Support for Academic 

Achievement 

1. Uphaus Elementary School Early Childhood Center $ 21,600,000 

2. Land acquisition for Linder Early Childhood Center $ 2,400,000 

3. Barrington Elementary School eight-classroom addition $ 4,313,318 

4. Hart Elementary School eight-classroom addition $ 4,442,242 

5. Langford Elementary School eight-classroom addition $ 4,367,607 

6. Undesignated elementary school $ 25,168,951 

7. Land acquisition for undesignated elementary school $ 2,574,880 

8. Auditorium replacement/renovation at Lanier and McCallum High Schools $ 16,742,000 

9. High school science laboratory additions/renovations $ 36,338,317 

10. Technology upgrades $ 69,850,000 

Total Proposition 1 $ 187,797,315 

Proposition 2 – Health, Safety, Environment, Critical Renovations, and Other 


1. Campus cafeteria kitchen renovation required by the Health Department $ 1,852,787 

2. Menchaca Elementary School internal roadway $ 826,836 

3. Purchase of low-emission school buses $ 12,205,600 

4. Capacitor bank installation to improve balance power demands $ 14,569,913 

5. Critical renovations at various campuses $ 37,213,068 

6. Upgrade of payroll software $ 1,045,000 

7. Replacement of cold storage warehouse $ 6,207,300 


Proposition 3 – Special Programs and Expansion 

1. District-wide performing arts facility and land acquisition $ 40,000,000 

2. Land acquisition for a future south high school $ 32,000,000 

3. Classroom addition and Fine Arts renovations at Anderson High School $ 10,000,000 


Grand Total $ 343,717,819 

Table 75 


September 

2012 348



Campus/Department 

FY2009 

Actual 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Actual and 

Remaining 




Akins High additions and renovations 430,843 2,785,554 1,078,859 92,132 102,596 

Austin High additions and renovations 397,097 6,897,701 1,342,390 417,609 308,711 

New Baldwin Elementary 2,679,664 13,306,899 611,653 174,595 125,703 

Barrington Elementary additions and renovations 357,475 2,585,053 82,246 136,579 51,109 

Bedichek Middle additions and renovations 3,831,466 288,360 102,923 62,967 67,268 

Bowie High science classrooms and renovations 571,670 3,074,674 238,064 137,774 167,910 

Burnet Middle renovations and improvements 2,216,908 254,698 71,760 13,278 69,650 

Construction Management 22,107,604 36,363,704 17,862,064 18,325,980 16,049,675 

Crockett High science classrooms and renovations 200,881 1,783,944 398,741 126,369 166,956 

Doss Elementary renovations and improvements 1,597,644 202,407 287,321 115,980 116,092 

Eastside Memorial renovations and improvements 3,241,195 1,926,638 237,317 402,261 203,919 

New Gorzycki Middle School 23,375,165 1,014,909 210,818 65,504 8,329 

Graham Elementary additions and renovations - 12,384 - - 48,049 

Hart Elementary additions and renovations 346,137 2,195,364 314,213 32,813 50,417 

Information System Admin upgrades 10,605,207 6,785,094 23,878,135 9,862,871 1,836,412 

L C Anderson High additions and renovations 1,736,450 8,948,432 2,844,526 465,205 169,290 

Langford Elementary additions and renovations 721,161 2,768,911 129,975 133,628 58,010 

Lanier High additions and renovations 3,943,228 1,432,769 4,250,939 2,712,277 282,756 

New Uphaus Early Childhood Center 155,464 1,149,513 2,373,251 11,880,026 4,351,662 

McCallum High additions and renovations 778,526 4,936,654 8,190,791 95,041 99,606 

Network Support Group technology upgrades 3,136,024 976,479 2,744,373 48,733 1,510,104 

New Performing Arts Center 698,417 8,292 6,579 5,147,664 17,201,184 

New Bus Terminal 62,891 9,960 - 2,414,622 1,801,387 

New buses and equipment - - - 105 - 

New North Central Elementary - - - 1,486,071 14,695,581 

New South High School Land - - - - 20,000,000 

New Undesignated North Central Elementary #2 3,796,922 11,876,871 

Warehouse additions and renovations 4,975,183 5,798,621 4,853,796 3,140,360 48,049 

Webb Middle additions and renovations 4,338,214 512,845 304,190 1,253,476 848,855 

Wooldridge Elementary additions and renovations 2,615,793 524,237 7,557 13,852 51,579 

Grand Total $ 95,120,304 $ 106,544,096 $ 72,422,480 $ 62,554,694 $ 92,367,730 

* Totals of those locations that do not amount to more than $3M and/or do not have major renovations or additions. 

** Technology upgrades charged to Network Support only as associated with current bond programs. 


September 

2012 349

Table 76 





FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




Variance 

Positive 

(Negative) 

% Variance 

Revenues 

Local Sources $ 39,218 $ 13,632 $ 30,768 $ 10,400 $ (20,368) -66.20% 

Other Sources 75,733,430 100,807,638 0 - (0) -100.0% 

Total Revenues 75,772,648 100,821,270 30,768 10,400 (20,368) -66.20% 


Pupil Transportation 2,953,948 3,763,768 180,000 0 (180,000) -100.00% 

Plant Maintenance 2,113,277 1,754,374 1,777,269 2,005,423 228,154 12.84% 

Data Processing Services 296,311 188,710 63,155 20,055 (43,100) -68.24% 

Debt Services 753,804 807,638 0 0 (0) -99.00% 

Facilities Acquisition & Construction 100,426,757 65,907,989 70,134,890 32,635,685 (37,499,205) -53.47% 


Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues 

Over Expenditures 

(30,771,449) 28,398,791 (72,124,546) (34,650,763) 37,473,783 

-51.96% 


Other Resources 0 (0) -100.00% 

Other Uses 1 (1) -100.0% 

Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) - - 1 - (1) -100.0% 

Net Change in Fund Balances (30,771,449) 28,398,791 (72,124,545) (34,650,763) 37,473,782 -51.96% 

Estimated outstanding purchase 

orders and unspent balances at year 

end (2,879) (28,250,911) 

Fund Balances- September 1 (Beginning) 498,454 (30,272,995) (1,874,204) (74,001,628) (136,903,302) 7304.6% 

Fund Balances - August 31 (Ending) (30,272,995) (1,874,204) (74,001,628) (136,903,302) (99,429,520) 134.4% 


September 

2012 350

Table 77 


Projected Construction Timeline 


September 

2012 351

Bond Program Development 

Background of Citizen’s 2008 Bond Advisory Committee 

The mission of the Austin Independent School District is that all students will progress academically and 

intellectually, and will graduate prepared for personal success and inspired to contribute to society. To 

provide facilities that will accommodate every student’s achievement, the AISD Board of Trustees created 

the Citizens’ 2008 Bond Advisory Committee (CBAC) to make recommendations for district facility needs. 

A 21-member Citizens Bond Advisory Committee, appointed by the Board of Trustees and the 

Superintendent, worked many months analyzing information and visiting various sites and campuses. The 

committee developed recommendations that included projects considered urgent in nature, required by 

law, or that needed to be addressed before another comprehensive bond program took place. 

In developing a scope of work for the proposed 2008 Bond Program, the CBAC considered a variety of issues 

that impact students’ welfare and achievement, as well as taxpayers’ long-term investment in district 

facilities. These considerations ranged from providing a district-wide Performing Arts Center to the renovation 

of facilities to address failing mechanical systems and the construction of new classrooms to 

relieve overcrowded schools. In doing its work, the Committee identified issues that were of immediate 

concern and of a critical nature, and if left unattended, would lead to much more expensive remediation in 

the long run. 

It was the Committee’s job to assess and prioritize needs identified by staff, principals and campus 

leaders. At all times, its goal was to develop a scope of work that would minimize the tax impact of the 

proposed 2008 Bond Program by focusing on projects of highest need, yet be comprehensive enough to 

equitably safeguard the taxpayers’ investment in AISD facilities and grounds. To achieve this end, the 

Committee adopted the following criteria to assess the merit of proposed projects: 

 

 

 

 

 

Narrow focus 

Urgent and important 

o Building/health code requirements and safety changes 

o Graduation requirements 

o Relief for schools at 125 percent or more of permanent capacity 

o Replacement of building components subject to imminent failure 

Making building system improvements critical to energy efficiency and environmental 

responsiveness 

Takes advantage of time-sensitive opportunities 

Minimal tax rate impact 


September 

2012 352

Bond Area of Focus 

I. Academic Achievement 

Science Requirements — As a result of state mandates that increase high school graduation 

requirements to four years each of science and math, there was an immediate need to add 

science classroom laboratories and upgrades in district high schools. 

Technology Services — To provide district students with technology services vital in today’s 

increasingly technologically dependent world, there was an urgent need to provide adequate 

funding for technology services in order to ensure equity throughout the district, support the core 

curriculum and provide updated administrative software. 

II. Health and Safety 

Campus Cafeteria/Kitchen Renovations — Funding for campus cafeteria kitchen renovations in 

approximately 40 schools was needed to meet current, more stringent Health Department code 

requirements. These required improvements included additional hand wash sinks, dishwashers, 

back flow preventers, and other plumbing modifications to ensure wastewater does not encroach 

into food preparation areas. Additional Health Department requirements mandated the installation 

of impervious ceiling finishes to ensure that the ceilings in food preparation areas and culinary 

arts classrooms do not retain odors as a by-product of the cooking process. 

Menchaca Elementary Internal Roadway — A priority safety project was the construction of an 

internal roadway on the Menchaca Elementary campus to create a parent drop-off and pick-up 

traffic loop to ensure safety at morning and afternoon peak traffic periods. This project was 

needed prior to the projected widening of both Manchaca Road and FM 1626, which is scheduled 

for completion in the next three to five years. 

III. Environmental Improvements 

Low-Emission School Buses — The funding for low-emission school buses assisted the district in 

accelerating the replacement of higher emission buses in the fleet, especially those buses that 

are approximately 17 years old. This also demonstrates the district’s commitment to cleaner air 

while achieving a fleet with over 60 percent low-emission buses. 

Additional buses will be necessary for the transition of magnet transportation services from 

Capital Metro to the district over the next four years. As the district offers additional student 

choice programs, such as the Global Studies High School, early childhood centers, and other 

instructional programming that require transporting students throughout the district, the need for 

more buses will increase. 

Capacitor Banks — The 2008 Bond Program included approximately $14.5 million for the 

installation of capacitor banks to improve balance electrical service needs across the district. The 

need for this installation was the result of a directive by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas 

(ERCOT) to energy providers, such as Austin Energy, to improve their efficiency of transmission 

or power factor starting in 2009. Fortunately, the city of Austin’s preliminary assessment of district 

facilities indicates that a few of the district facilities will require a power factor adjustment. This 

means that a substantial part of the allotted $14.5 million will remain in the contingency fund. 


September 

2012 353

IV. Renovations and Upgrades to Protect Taxpayers’ Investments 

Payroll Software — The software system for payroll needed to be updated. The district was using 

a paper and pencil methodology to collect time and attendance for its employees, the same 

system that was used 100 years ago. With new technology available, the district wanted to 

purchase the software to electronically capture the time and attendance of employees to ensure 

accurate compensation for employees’ services. 

Cold-Storage Warehouse — The floor of the cold storage warehouse for the Food Services 

Department had expanded or “heaved” upward due to water wicking up, freezing and expanding 

the soil under the floor. It was in need of repair or replacement because it serves as storage for 

all the frozen food used to provide meals to all AISD students. After a discussion of several 

options, the Committee’s recommendation was to replace the existing cold-storage warehouse. 

Using the existing space during the construction of the new cold-storage warehouse avoided the 

problems involved in having daily deliveries of frozen food items from San Antonio. This also 

allowed for easy conversion of the old cold-storage space into much needed dry storage space 

for the district. 

Scope of Work for Critical Renovations 

At several schools across the district, air quality systems, designed around out-dated and nolonger-appropriate 

technology, were at the end of their useful lives. These geothermal groundloop 

or earth-coupled heat pump systems needed to be replaced with more reliable and 

sustainable systems. 

In addition, AISD construction management staff developed a list of immediate needs at various 

campuses, such as needed restroom repairs. If these items were left unattended, much more 

expensive remediation would have been required in the long run. Additional projects needing 

immediate attention were submitted by principals and various district-wide departments. These 

projects also include items presented during the public forums. 

Performing Arts Center 

In order to fulfill voter expectations associated with approval of the May 10, 2008 bond 

proposition that authorizes expenditures by the district to construct a student performing arts 

center, the Board of Trustees and district administration jointly created the Performing Arts Center 

Task Force (PACTF). 

On April 26, 2011, the Board of Trustees voted to move forward with the purchase of a site for the 

district-wide Performing Arts Center (PAC). The approved site is located in the Mueller 

development along Mueller Boulevard between 51st Street and Barbara Jordan Boulevard. 


September 

2012 354

Following a comprehensive site selection process and evaluation of 28 proposed sites, AISD staff and the 

real-estate consultant recommended the site because it best fits the site selection criteria developed by 

the Performing Arts Center Task Force and the district's own site selection criteria including, but not 

limited to: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Efficiency of location (for building orientation and public access) 

Central location in the district (as compared to other candidate sites) 

Availability of utilities 

Proximity to mass transit 

Potential for mixed use 

Availability of nearby amenities and services 

This land acquisition and the future construction of the PAC are fully funded through the bond package 

approved by voters in 2008. The PAC will provide the district with a much-needed facility to serve not only 

the band, orchestra, theater, dance and visual arts students, but also accommodate events such as 

assemblies and commencement ceremonies that currently require the district to rent space. A 

comprehensive feasibility study was conducted before the site was purchased. 

As the process continues, the board-appointed Performing Arts Center Task Force will continue to 

oversee the development of the PAC and there will be future opportunities for the community to provide 

feedback. 

Capital Projects Impact on the General Fund 

Given the current budget challenges, the district is considering how the operation of the PAC will affect 

future general maintenance and operation (M&O) funds to ensure that the timing of the opening of the 

PAC is compatible with the district's budget. If there is a decision to delay the construction of the PAC, 

purchasing the land now ensures the district is able to secure a centrally located site and allows the 

district to acquire the site at a more advantageous cost than will likely be available at a later time. The 

district currently plans to have the PAC completed for the FY2014 school year. The district anticipates the 

PAC start-up costs will be approximately $250,000 in FY2013. 

The Uphaus Early Childhood Center will open in FY2013 and a newly constructed elementary school in 

North Central Austin is projected to open in FY2014. Opening new facilities that were constructed using 

the Capital Projects Fund have a significant impact on the district’s operating budget. It currently costs the 

district approximately $838,283 to open a new elementary school. If utilities and / or salaries increase in 

future years, the total expenditures to open new schools will also increase. 


September 

2012 355

Table 78 



Project Number Project Name 

Current 

Construction 


P06-0016-NEWBT New Bus Terminal $ 10,074,902 

Construction of a new bus storage, maintenance and fueling facility. Work includes the construction of an administration 

building of approximately 7,614 square feet, and a six-bay shop. A maintenance building of approximately 13,080 square 

feet will also be built. The design also includes associated site improvements consisting of parking for 180 buses and staff 

parking for 200 vehicles, a bus wash bay and covered fueling area. 

Operating Budget Impact: $ 8,000,000 

Overhead costs such as terminal administration, utilities, custodial services and other costs of 

operating the bus terminal. The new bus terminal will be built with energy efficiency in mind. 

P06-0039-SCFLD Construct Soccer Fields $ 1,890,300 

Construction of a new competition soccer field complex to include parking, restroom/concessions, playground, walking 

track, and practice area. Work also includes associated site improvements consisting of landscaping and on-site storm 

water detention facilities. 

Operating Budget Impact: $ 13,707 

Overhead costs will be determined when a site is selected. 

P08-0026-NCES1 New North Central Elementary School $ 19,560,827 

Work includes the construction of a new 32-classroom elementary school of approximately 86,000 square feet, with a core 

facility that will accommodate a future eight-classroom addition. The design will also include associated site improvements 

including play fields, playgrounds, parking lots, bus circulation and automobile drives. 


Overhead costs such as school administration, utilities, custodial services and other costs not 

directly related to classroom instruction are included. The new school will be built with energy 

efficiency in mind. 

P09-0058-ECCL Acquire Land & Construct New Early Childhood Center $ 20,267,555 

Construction of a new Early Childhood Demonstration Center. Work includes the construction of a 24-classroom school 

with the ability to accommodate a future eight-classroom addition. The school will be approximately 72,000 square feet in 

size, with 78 parking spaces and bus drop-off and pick-up. Included in the school are shared common areas, and 

administrative suite, a library/media center, music and art classrooms, multi-purpose spaces and other ancillary and support 

spaces. 






September 

2012 356

Project Number 

Project Name 




Current 

Construction 


P09-0059-PAC2 Acquire Land & Construct New Performing Arts Center $ 35,065,252 

Construction of a new 60,000 square foot Performing Arts Facility to accommodate 1,200 seats. The design includes a 

performance stage, seating are, loading dock, dressing rooms, a lobby and concessions area. Site work will include 

parking for the facility as well as landscaping and storm water control improvements. 


Overhead costs such as facility administration, utilities, custodial services and other costs of 

operating the performing arts center. The new Performing Arts Center will be built with energy 


P09-0072-SHSL Land Acquisition for New South High School $ 32,000,000 

Purchase of the land for the New South High School to be built and opened at some future date. 


Overhead costs for now to include only minimal cleanup and maintenance of the property. 

P12-0013-UES Purchase Land and Construct New Undesignated Elementary School $ 25,770,837 

Work will include the construction of a new 32-classroom school of approximately 86,000 square feet, with a core facility 

that will accommodate a future eight-classroom addition. The design will also include associated site improvement including 

play fields, playgrounds, parking lots, bus circulation and automobile drives. 





Various Various Technology projects $ 69,850,000 

To provide district students with technology services vital in today's increasingly technologically dependent world, there is an 

urgent need to provide adequate funding for technology services in order to ensure equity throughout the district, support 

the core curriculum and provide updated administrative software. 

Operating Budget Impact: $ 1,120,000 

Overhead costs include annual maintenance agreement costs and staff time to support equipment, 

training and systems related to these implementations. 


September 

2012 357

Grant Funds 

In addition to the previously discussed Governmental Funds, Austin ISD receives grant funds from a 

variety of sources. Grant funds have strict provisions and are generally restricted for a specific purpose. 

The district may not use these funds for anything other than what is listed in the Notice of Grant Award 

(NOGA). Grants have varying time spans. Some grants may be received on an annual basis, while other 

grants may be for multiple years for a specific project or program. 

Federal Grants 

Title I Grants are the largest source of grant funds for the district. Title I funding is intended to provide 

additional funding to schools with high numbers or percentages of children from low-income families. It is 

estimated AISD will receive and spend more than $31.5 million in Title I funds during the FY2013 school 

year. Five high schools, 11 middle school, and 50 elementary schools in the district will receive Title I 

funding. 

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides funding to assist states and local 

educational agencies to educate students with disabilities. IDEA Grants are the next largest source of 

grant funding for the district. It is estimated the district will be awarded approximately $18.1 million for 


The district projects it will receive $4.5 million from the federally funded Title II, Teacher & Principal 

Training and Recruiting Grant; $3.72 million from the Title III, Part A English Language Acquisitions and 

Language Enhancement Grant; and $3.5 million from the Title IV, 21st Century Community Learning 

Centers Grant. The 21st Century Grant supports the creation of community learning centers to provide 

academic enrichment opportunities during non-school hours for children who attend high-poverty and lowperforming 

schools. 

It is estimated the district will receive $1.3 million from the Career and Technical Basic Grant, which is 

also federally funded. This grant provides funding for secondary and post-secondary career and technical 

education programs. 

AISD received $13.8 million from the federal Edujobs Grant in FY2012. Unfortunately, this grant was 

meant to be a one-year infusion of revenue, and AISD will not be granted any additional Edujobs Grant 

revenue in FY2013. The Edujobs Grant helped support full-day pre-kindergarten, provided an additional 

planning period at the secondary level, and funded school librarian salaries. The loss of these funds will 

shift these expenditures to the General Fund. 

Sequestration and Federal Grant Funding 

On May 29, 2012, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) informed Austin ISD of the possibility that all 

federal grants administered by the TEA may be reduced for the FY2013 school and grant year by an 

amount ranging from 8 to 14 percent. However, on July 25, 2012, the TEA issued new guidance from the 

U.S. Department of Education. The process by which this reduction may take place, known as 

sequestration, is a provision of the Budget Control Act of 2011. If Congress fails to take action by January 

2, 2013, federal education spending will be cut for the FY2014 school and grant year. Instead of taking of 

sequestered funds from the FY2013 school year appropriations as communicated on May 29, 2012, the 

funds will now be sequestered from the funds that will be available in July 2013 for the FY2014 school 

year. 


September 

2012 358

Table 79 


Grant Funding from Federal Sources 

Statement of Revenues and Expenditures by Grant 


Revenues 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 



Projected 

$ Variance 

from FY2012 


% Variance 

from FY2012 


5900 Federal Sources 

Title I $ 23,704,800 $ 28,425,229 $ 30,971,538 $ 31,799,055 $ 827,517 3% 

IDEA Grant 16,190,755 12,572,034 15,149,310 19,499,577 4,350,267 35% 

Title II 4,002,130 3,951,933 3,237,133 3,130,006 (107,127) -3% 

Title III 3,103,982 2,078,002 2,671,603 2,321,953 (349,650) -17% 

Title IV 3,644,626 3,227,128 1,982,630 3,461,630 1,479,000 46% 

Career and Technical - Basic Grant 1,279,638 1,248,132 1,189,683 1,051,743 (137,940) -11% 

Total Federal Revenues 

$ 51,925,931 $ 51,502,458 $ 55,201,897 $ 61,263,964 $ 6,062,067 12% 

Expenditures 

By Function 

11 Instruction 29,451,153 30,624,428 33,612,298 34,703,005 1,090,707 4% 

12 Instructional Resources & Media Services 229,087 720,003 112,412 204,801 92,389 13% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development 4,845,749 5,404,606 7,267,785 9,801,868 2,534,083 47% 

21 Instructional Administration 3,257,340 1,986,780 2,358,625 2,040,461 (318,164) -16% 

23 School Administration 1,575,776 2,089,877 1,842,176 2,417,416 575,240 28% 

31 Guidance & Counseling Services 5,472,251 4,172,702 4,203,337 4,130,138 -73,199 -2% 

32 Attendance & Social Work Services 836,903 893,364 1,059,809 345,794 (714,015) -80% 

33 Health Services 232,943 148,569 155,549 88,360 (67,189) -45% 

34 Pupil Transportation 349,036 171,815 250,000 700,000 450,000 262% 

35 Food Services 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

36 Co-Curricular Activities 65,206 45,163 64,677 313,480 248,803 551% 

41 General Administration 221,108 241,651 288,963 285,599 (3,364) -1% 

51 Plant Maintenance 27,569 21,686 45,676 27,035 (18,641) -86% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services 28,198 3,298 6,200 13,610 7,410 225% 

53 Data Processing Services 643,932 721,534 571,664 942,998 371,334 51% 

61 Community Services 4,689,680 4,256,982 3,362,726 5,249,399 1,886,673 44% 

71 Debt Services 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

91 Contracted Instructional Srvcs-Public Schools 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

93 Payments-Shared Services Arrangements 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 0 0 0 0 0 0% 

Total Expenditures $ 51,925,931 $ 51,502,458 $ 55,201,897 $ 61,263,964 $ 6,062,067 10% 

*Note: This table provides the Federal Grant information at the time of print. The district is awarded varying amounts each year and 

varies depending on the student population. 


September 

2012 359

Corporate and Philanthropic Partnership Support 

Despite the recent economic downturn, numerous corporate and philanthropic partners continue to help 

AISD achieve exemplary results with our students, parents and families. Partners help by providing direct 

financial support, by supporting community partners who work with students in our schools and by giving 

hundreds of volunteer hours directly to our schools and through our volunteer organization, Austin 

Partners in Education. 

In AISD, our strategic partners help teachers and schools address important issues that can impede 

student learning. Support from partners improves the overall climate in the school and district for learning 

and prepares all students to be ready for college, career and life. 

However, AISD continues to anticipate an increasingly strained financial landscape in education, facing 

potentially unprecedented cuts in the next five years. We anticipate the need to secure $30 million in 

external private funding over the next three years to continue to provide new delivery models, improve the 

overall school and district climate for learning and develop academic achievement and support strategies 

for special populations through accelerated and differentiated instruction. Without the direct financial and 

volunteer support that partners provide, AISD will not be able to continue to provide new delivery models, 

improve the overall school and district climate for learning and develop academic achievement and 

support strategies for special populations through accelerated and differentiated instruction. AISD 

appreciates those partners who have invested with a long-term view and welcome others who may want 

to join us in creating an exceptional educational experience. 

In FY2010, a Comprehensive Resource Development Needs Assessment, which surveyed 1,000 district 

staff and external partners, showed that the district is poised for a partnership and investment 

renaissance if it can leverage its relationship strengths, reduce confusion and duplication of effort and 

improve shared accountability. 

To meet this need, AISD established the Office of Innovation and Development (IAD) to provide a 

centralized location for partner support for external resource development. IAD brings significant new 

external resources to the school district to support initiatives deemed crucial to the progress of the district, 

creating a coherent and strategic infrastructure to bring in the highest possible yield of both public and 

private funds to enable the district to carry out its Strategic Plan. 

IAD now provides resource development and management supports and services to district, campus and 

individual staff and external partners including: 

 

 

 

 

Creating opportunities to share innovative program investments with external partners 

Identifying and sharing funding opportunities 

Facilitating and writing strategic funding proposals 

Providing technical assistance for grant writing and grant management, trainings, workshops and 

individual professional development opportunities, and access to online funding resources. 


September 

2012 360

Partners 

Building strategic partnerships and creating district-wide priorities allows the district to provide new 

delivery models, duplicate best practices and accelerate effective programming. AISD’s Office of 

Innovation and Development is proud to work with the following partners who are active participants in the 

district’s growth: 

3M Foundation 

Applied Materials 

Austin Chamber of Commerce 

Buena Vista Foundation 


E3 Alliance 

Bill & Melinda 

Gates Foundation 

Google 

HEB 

IBM 

Intel 

KDK Harman Foundation 

Kennedy Center 

KLE Foundation 

Klein Family Foundation 

Matt Foundation 

Michael & Susan 

Dell Foundation (MSDF) 

Moody Foundation 

Mueller Foundation 

National Instruments 

NoVo Foundation 

RGK Foundation 

Seedling Foundation 

Seton Family of Hospitals 

Skillpoint Alliance 

Sooch Foundation 

St. David’s Foundation 

Tapestry Foundation 

Target 

Teacher Heaven 

Time Warner Cable 

United Way–Capital Area 

Univision 

Wells Fargo 

Whole Foods 


September 

2012 361

The Office of Innovation and Development (IAD) has submitted more than $14.7 million in grants to date, 

and has been awarded approximately $6.9 million to date (many grants are still pending). IAD has also 

seen a 50 percent growth in partnerships over the past year. Highlights of key grants awarded include: 

TEA Texas Literacy Initiative 

Grant (Striving Readers) - 

$5,130,000: AISD was awarded 

these funds to support the 

district’s literacy plan, and to 

enhance literacy instruction from 

early childhood through high 

school in the Travis and Lanier 

vertical teams. 

NoVo Foundation CASEL - 

$750,000: AISD was recognized 

as one of eight districts nationally 

to join a cohort with the Center for 

Academic and Social Emotional 

Learning. Funds awarded from the 

NoVo Foundation will support the 

expansion of Social Emotional 

Learning Initiative to AISD schools 

and district staff. 

Dairy Max’s Fuel Up to Play 60 Grant - $320,000: All 81 AISD elementary schools were recently 

awarded “Fuel Up to Play” grants from Dairy Max. Each school is receiving $4,000 to increase 

physical activity while learning fundamental mathematics, science and nutrition. 

RGK Foundation Middle Schools, Let’s Move! Program- $150,000: AISD was awarded this grant 

to expand HOPSports! at all AISD Middle Schools. HOPSports is a system that combines movement 

and technology by integrating music, art, movement, nutrition, social messaging, environmental 

awareness and career consciousness. The HOPSports lessons are captivating to students and 

enable physical education instructors to monitor their students at greater depth. 

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation $100,000: In January 2012, the Bill & Melinda Gates 

Foundation awarded $100,000 in funding to support the development of the Austin District-Charter 

Collaboration Compact. 

Target Literacy Grant, ACE expansion - $100,000: AISD was awarded this grant to expand early 

literacy tutoring programming through the ACE program in AISD, providing low-income schools with 

highly trained AmeriCorps tutors to ensure that children advance to grade level in reading before third 

grade. 


September 

2012 362

3M Shoot n’ Share Camcorder Product Donation - $74,000 (in-kind): All AISD schools were 

awarded camcorders amounting to $74,000 in in-kind product donation from 3M. The donated 

camcorders will be used to improve the instructional quality and hands-on interaction skills with 

technology between student and instructor. 

KDK Harman Foundation’s 2012 Summer STEM and Robotics Academy - $50,000: The Eastside 

Memorial Vertical Team was awarded a second year of funding for this three-week summer academy 

that incorporates STEM and robotics-focused instruction to 180 rising fifth and sixth graders. 

Teachers will also receive Robotics Professional Development. 

Sooch Foundation - $20,000: AISD will receive support to launch a cutting-edge, multicultural 

outreach radio program for the AISD community. 

Intel’s Austin Mini-Educator Academy Grant - $15,000: AISD was awarded this grant to provide 15 

AISD teachers with the knowledge, skills and resources to assist and motivate students in the 

development of science fair projects. It will also provide teachers with models and best practices for 

providing students with research-based courses and experiences. 

mindPOP/Kennedy Center Any Given Child program: The John F. Kennedy Center for the 

Performing Arts has chosen Austin as the seventh partner city for Any Given Child, a program that 

creates a long-range arts education plan for students in grades K-8. The program will incorporate 

existing AISD resources, along with those of local arts organizations and the Kennedy Center, to 

create a plan for arts education specific to the city. A working group from Any Given Child is currently 

assessing the district’s fine arts programs to create a strategic plan to guide our work. A preliminary 

analysis of AISD students who are highly engaged in fine arts mirrors national studies. 

For more information about IAD or how you can support the district in meeting its external private funding 

goal, please visit the website at www.austinisd.org/IAD. For information on news and current funding 

opportunities, visit http://aisdinnovation.blogspot.com/ 


September 

2012 363


Proprietary funds focus on the determination of operating income, changes in net assets (or cost 

recovery), financial position and cash flows. There are two different types of proprietary funds: enterprise 

funds and internal service funds. Proprietary funds report an activity for which a fee is charged to external 

users for good or services. Internal service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided 

by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental unit, or to other 

governmental units, on a cost-reimbursable basis. 

Table 80 


Propriety Funds – Print Shop Reproduction 

Statement of Revenues, Expenditures by Function, and Changes in Fund Net Assets 


FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




% Variance 

Increase 

(Decrease) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Revenues 

Local Sources $ 322,080 $ 343,133 $ 296,187 $ 460,000 $ 163,813 55.3% 

Total Revenues 322,080 343,133 296,187 460,000 163,813 55.3% 

Expenditures 

Current 

41 General Administration 368,997 398,864 296,187 460,000 163,813 55.3% 

Total Expenditures 368,997 398,864 296,187 460,000 163,813 55.3% 


Revenues Over 

Expenditures 

Total Net Assets - Sept.1 

(Beginning) 

Total Net Assets - Aug. 31 

(Ending) 

(46,917) (55,731) - - - 0.0% 

298,593 251,676 195,945 195,945 - 0.0% 

$ 251,676 $ 195,945 $ 195,945 $ 195,945 $ - 0.0% 


September 

2012 364

Table 81 


Propriety Funds – Worker’s Compensation Fund 



FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




% Variance 

Increase 

(Decrease) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Revenues 

Local Sources $ 2,297,388 $ 2,189,370 $ 2,524,436 $ 3,020,936 $ 496,500 19.7% 

Total Revenues 2,297,388 2,189,370 2,524,436 3,020,936 496,500 19.7% 

Expenditures 

Current 

41 General Administration 2,594,713 2,606,514 2,524,436 3,020,936 $ 496,500 19.7% 

Total Expenditures 2,594,713 2,606,514 2,524,436 3,020,936 496,500 19.7% 


Revenues Over 

Expenditures 


(Beginning) 


(Ending) 

(297,325) (417,144) - - - 0.0% 

20,820,431 20,523,106 20,105,962 20,105,962 - 0.0% 

$ 20,523,106 $ 20,105,962 $ 20,105,962 $ 20,105,962 $ - 0.0% 

Table 82 


Propriety Funds – Health Insurance Fund 



FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




% Variance 

Increase 

(Decrease) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Revenues 

Local Sources $ 5,093,911 $ 70,662,799 $ 64,941,269 $ 69,060,894 $ 4,119,625 6.3% 

Total Revenues 5,093,911 70,662,799 64,941,269 69,060,894 4,119,625 6.3% 

Expenditures 

Current 

41 General Administration 96,276 71,255,581 64,941,269 69,060,894 $ 4,119,625 6.3% 

Total Expenditures 96,276 71,255,581 64,941,269 69,060,894 4,119,625 6.3% 


Revenues Over 

Expenditures 


(Beginning) 


(Ending) 

4,997,635 (592,782) - - - 0.0% 

- 4,997,635 4,404,853 4,404,853 - 0.0% 

$ 4,997,635 $ 4,404,853 $ 4,404,853 $ 4,404,853 $ - 0.0% 


September 

2012 365

Table 83 


Propriety Funds – Laundry Service 



FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




% Variance 

Increase 

(Decrease) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Revenues 

Local Sources $ 254,393 $ 257,828 $ 249,543 $ 244,727 $ (4,816) -1.9% 

Total Revenues 254,393 257,828 249,543 244,727 (4,816) -1.9% 

Expenditures 

Current 

41 General Administration 209,720 220,004 249,543 244,727 $ (4,816) -1.9% 

Total Expenditures 209,720 220,004 249,543 244,727 (4,816) -1.9% 


Revenues Over 

Expenditures 


(Beginning) 


(Ending) 

44,673 37,824 - - - 0.0% 

500,399 545,072 582,896 582,896 - 0.0% 

$ 545,072 $ 582,896 $ 582,896 $ 582,896 $ - 0.0% 

Table 84 


Propriety Funds – District Police 



FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 




% Variance 

Increase 

(Decrease) 

% Variance 

FY2012 and 


Revenues 

Local Sources $ 618,890 $ 473,089 $ 640,042 $ 627,016 $ (13,026) -2.0% 

Total Revenues 618,890 473,089 640,042 627,016 (13,026) -2.0% 

Expenditures 

Current 

41 General Administration 616,601 534,297 627,016 627,016 $ - 0.0% 

Total Expenditures 616,601 534,297 627,016 627,016 - 0.0% 


Revenues Over 

Expenditures 

2,289 (61,208) 13,026 - (13,026) 0.0% 

Transfers In 48,182 


(Beginning) 


(Ending) 

(2,289) - (13,026) - 13,026 -100.0% 

$ - $ (13,026) $ - $ - $ - 0.0% 


September 

2012 366


Information


Information Section 

The Information Section provides specific information about taxable values, tax rates, the impact of the 

tax levy on a single family residence, student information, staffing, future year budget projections, building 

and square footage data, benchmarks, local and urban peer comparisons, food services, transportation, 

risk management, academic programs, accountability indicators, academic assessment and 

accountability, parent survey results, accomplishments, demographics, and local statistics. 

AISD Carruth Administration Center, 1111 West 6 th Street, Austin, TX 78703 


September 

2012 367

Taxable Value Information 

The District received the preliminary and certified taxable value information from the Travis Central 

Appraisal District (TCAD) in May and in July respectively. Property taxes are calculated on net taxable 

value after allowable exemptions and freeze tax ceilings are subtracted. Taxes are calculated on each 

$100 of net taxable value. Tax levy of the freeze portion is calculated by TCAD and provided to the 

District. This amount is added to current net taxable levy to arrive at the total levy. Revenues for current 

property taxes are based on a 99% collection rate. 

On January 1 st of each year the property values are rendered for appraisal. The appraisal process is 

conducted by the TCAD. TCAD is scheduled to submit preliminary values to the school district by May 1 st . 

These values are usually a conservative estimate of the ultimate certified values that are released on or 

before July 25 th . Once the certified values are received by the district, the budget process and tax rate 

adoption can be completed for the upcoming school year. 

Table 85 


Net Taxable Value Summary 

2012 Certification FY2013 School Year 


Net Taxable Value (before freeze) $ 

64,852,952,572 

Less: Freeze Taxable Value $ 

(5,742,370,929) 

Net Taxable Value (after freeze) $ 

59,110,581,643 

Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year $ 

2,235,137,507 

% Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year 3.93% 

Net Taxable Levy $ 

734,153,424 

Freeze Ceiling Taxes $ 

37,600,000 

Total Levy $ 

771,753,424 

% Actual Collections to Levy 99.00% 

Budget - Current 

Local Maintenance $ 

663,763,869 

Debt Service $ 

100,272,021 

Total $ 

764,035,890 

Over the last ten years, the district’s taxable value growth has averaged 5.2 percent. The largest growth 

was in 2006 when the certified taxable value increased 14.4 percent and the smallest was in 2004 when 

the taxable property value decreased 3.9 percent. The net taxable property value for the AISD FY2013 

will increase by $2.2 billion or 3.9 percent over FY2012. Future year forecasts through FY2015 indicate 

property tax values will gradually increase with an annual growth rate ranging from 2.2 percent to 2.4 

percent. 


September 

2012 368

Billions 













Increases in home values generally lead to higher tax bills. Texas law limits the amount that a house 

value can increase from one year to the next. Under the state’s 10 percent appraisal cap policy, even if a 

home value goes up by more than 10 percent in one year, the homeowner will not have to pay a tax 

increase beyond the 10 percent in that one-year period. 

Table 86 


Net Taxable Value History and Projections 

70 

60 

50.570 

56.267 57.795 

56.281 56.875 

59.111 

60.504 

61.822 

50 

40.192 

38.928 

44.525 

40 

41.826 

30 

20 

10 

- 

Tax Year 


September 

2012 369

Table 87 


Appraised Value and Net Taxable Value Comparison 

Tax Year as of 

Jan 1 Appraised Value Net Taxable Value % Change 

2005 Certified 45,220,204,020 38,927,581,137 -3.15% 

2006 Certified 52,002,032,729 44,525,141,427 14.38% 

2007 Certified 57,529,363,484 50,570,268,178 13.58% 

2008 Certified 66,020,279,293 56,266,583,957 11.26% 

2009 Certified 67,348,249,511 57,794,696,337 2.72% 

2010 Certified 64,829,368,183 56,280,681,272 -2.62% 

2011 Certified 66,849,047,224 56,875,444,136 1.06% 

2012 Certified 77,976,307,203 59,110,581,643 3.93% 

2013 Projected 78,988,511,303 60,504,376,265 2.36% 

2014 Projected 80,306,598,828 61,822,463,790 2.18% 

The tax levy is calculated from the net taxable value at a 99% collection rate. The actual taxes to be 

collected on the Freeze Taxable Values for patrons, who are over 65 years old, are calculated separately 

and then added back. The above table represents the historical net taxable value, the current fiscal year 

and future projections. 

The frozen ceiling taxes are authorized under a local provision that provides an “over 65 exemption”, 

which allows patrons who are at 65 years of age to not be subject to increased taxes regardless of what 

happens to their property values or the district tax rates. Their taxes are essentially frozen. The 

combination of the net taxable value levy and the levy on frozen values equals the total levy for the year. 

The tax collections from local property values are the largest source of income for the district. The total 

tax rate is comprised of two component rates, each having separate purposes and state laws governing 

them – Maintenance and Operations (M&O) and Interest and Sinking (I&S). 

The M&O tax rate supports the major operational and education programs of the district whereas the I&S 

tax rate supports the repayment of bonded debts that were authorized by the Austin voters. The tax rate 

for FY2013 will remain at $1.079 for Maintenance and Operations (M&O) and the Interest and Sinking 

fund tax rate will remain at $0.163 per hundred dollars of assessed value. The total tax rate for FY2013 

will be $1.242. 


September 

2012 370

Table 88 


Total Tax Levy 

Forecasts 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 


Net Taxable Value (before freeze) $ 64,460,255,568 $ 61,570,945,154 $ 61,870,932,381 $ 64,852,952,572 $ 65,904,376,265 $ 67,222,463,790 

Less: Freeze Taxable Value $ (6,665,559,231) $ (5,290,263,882) $ (4,995,488,245) $ (5,742,370,929) $ (5,400,000,000) $ (5,400,000,000) 

Net Taxable Value (after freeze) $ 57,794,696,337 $ 56,280,681,272 $ 56,875,444,136 $ 59,110,581,643 $ 60,504,376,265 $ 61,822,463,790 

Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year $ 1,528,112,380 $ (1,514,015,065) $ 594,762,864 $ 2,235,137,507 $ 1,393,794,622 $ 1,318,087,525 

% Increase (Decrease) Over Prior Year 2.7158% -2.6196% 1.0568% 3.9299% 2.3579% 2.1785% 

Net Taxable Levy $ 694,692,250 $ 690,563,959 $ 706,393,016 $ 734,153,424 $ 751,464,353 $ 767,835,000 

Freeze Ceiling Taxes $ 30,106,823 $ 28,405,788 $ 32,000,000 $ 37,600,000 $ 37,600,000 $ 37,600,000 

Total Levy $ 724,799,073 $ 718,969,747 $ 738,393,016 $ 771,753,424 $ 789,064,353 $ 805,435,000 

% Actual Collections to Levy 97.80% 97.80% 97.80% 99.00% 99.00% 99.00% 

Tax Rates 

Local Maintenance 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 

Debt Service 0.123 0.148 0.163 0.163 0.163 0.163 

Total 1.202 1.227 1.242 1.242 1.242 1.242 

Budgeted Tax Levies 

Local Maintenance $ 636,316,905 $ 618,338,593 $ 627,373,664 $ 663,763,869 $ 678,652,522 $ 692,732,465 

Debt Service $ 72,536,589 $ 84,813,820 $ 94,774,706 $ 100,272,021 $ 102,521,187 $ 104,648,185 

Total $ 708,853,493 $ 703,152,413 $ 722,148,370 $ 764,035,890 $ 781,173,710 $ 797,380,650 


September 

2012 371

Combined Tax Rate 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.5000 

1.3700 

1.0400 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

1.0790 

Table 89 


Tax Rate History 

1.8000 

1.6000 

1.5964 1.6137 1.6230 1.6230 

1.4930 

1.4000 

1.2000 

1.1630 1.2020 1.2020 1.2270 1.2420 1.2420 

1.0000 

0.8000 

0.6000 

0.4000 

0.2000 

0.0000 


Interest & Sinking 

Maintenance & Operations 

Despite the increase that was approved by voters in FY2009, Austin ISD will have the second lowest tax 

rate in FY2013 when compared to other local school districts in the metro area. The below table illustrates 

the local FY2013 tax rates for Eanes ISD, Austin ISD, Lake Travis ISD, Round Rock ISD, Leander ISD, 

Pflugerville ISD, Hays CISD, Bastrop ISD, Manor ISD, and Del Valle ISD. 


September 

2012 372

Table 90 


FY2013 Central Texas School District Property Tax Rates 

$1.6000 

$1.4000 

$1.2000 

$1.0000 

$0.8000 

$0.6000 

$0.4000 

$0.2000 

$- 

$1.2125 

Eanes ISD 

M&O 

I&S 

$1.242 



$1.380 

Round 

Rock ISD 

$1.4075 

Lake 

Travis ISD 

$1.4613 

Hays 

CISD 

$1.481 

Bastrop 


$1.5119 

Leander 


$1.515 

Manor 


$1.530 $1.540 

Del Valle 


Pfluger 

ville ISD 

I&S $0.1725 $0.1630 $0.3400 $0.3675 $0.4213 $0.4410 $0.4719 $0.4750 $0.4900 $0.5000 

M&O $1.0400 $1.0790 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 $1.0400 


September 

2012 373

Impact of Tax Levy on Single Family Residence 

As illustrated in the table below, there is a significant difference between the average residential median 

value and the residential average market value in relationship to residential property values and their 

respective tax levy. In general, median residential values tend to illustrate a more accurate representation 

of residential values since they are not skewed by the most expensive outlier residential values. For 

example, if there were nine residences valued at $200,000 and one residence valued at $1,000,000 the 

median home value would be $200,000 and the average home value would be $280,000. 

Table 91 


Analysis of Tax Burden per Travis Central Appraisal District (TCAD) 

Certified as of 

07-25-2012 


Median Market Value of Residence $ 222,549 $ 215,174 $ 210,065 $ 208,234 

Median Taxable Value 194,430 195,361 192,980 191,358 


Tax Levy on Median Residence 2,337 2,397 2,397 2,377 

Net Increase In Tax Levy 60 (0) (20) 

Avg Market Value of Residence $ 277,663 $ 265,573 $ 261,793 $ 262,167 

Avg Taxable Value 248,405 245,593 243,966 244,534 


Tax Levy on Average Residence 2,986 3,013 3,030 3,037 

Net Increase In Tax Levy 28 17 7 

Median Home Value Analysis - Taxes to fund programs and services for the FY2013 school year will 

decrease by an estimated $20 for the median homeowner due to a slight decrease in the median value. 

This is based on a residence’s median market value of $208,234 (with a median taxable value of 

$191,358) in FY2013 at a tax rate of $1.242/per $100 assessed value. This is a slight decrease when 

compared to the median prior year FY2012 market value of $210,065 (with average taxable value of 

$192,980) at the same tax rate of $1.242/per $100. Based on preliminary values as of May 2012, the tax 

bill in FY2012 for a $210,065 home will be $2,397 and the tax bill in FY2013 for the same home (now 

valued at $208,234) will be $2,377. 

Average Home Value Analysis - Taxes for the FY2013 school year will increase by an estimated $7 for 

the average homeowner due to a slight increase in the average market value. This is based on a 

residence’s average market value of $262,167 (with average taxable value of $244,534) in FY2013 at a 

tax rate of $1.242/per $100 assessed value. This is a slight increase when compared to the average prior 

year FY2012 market value of $261,793 (with average taxable value of $243,966) at the same tax rate of 

$1.242/per $100. Based on the certified values as of July 2012, the tax bill in FY2012 for a $261,793 

home will be $3,030 and the tax bill in FY2013 for the same home (now valued at $262,167) will be 

$3,037. 


September 

2012 374

The state limits how much a school district can increase its tax rate from the previous year. Each taxing 

entity must calculate its rollback rate. The rollback rate is the maximum rate that can be adopted before 

an automatic rollback election takes place. If the district adopts a tax rate that is higher than the rollback 

rate, voters can either affirm the proposed higher rate through an election or roll it back to the rollback 

rate. Also, individual property value increases are capped annually at 10 percent. 

Table 92 


Property Tax Levies & Collections - Last Ten Years and Current 

Fiscal 

Year 

M & O 

Tax Rate 

(per 

$100) 

I & S 

Tax Rate 

(per 

$100) 

Total Tax 

Rate Taxable Values Total Levy 

Current Taxes 

Collected 

% Current 

Taxes 

Collected 

Current & 

Delinquent 

Taxes 

Collected 

% Total 

Taxes 

Collected 

FY2003 $ 1.5000 $ 0.0964 $ 1.5964 $ 41,826,379,899 $ 645,328,942 $ 632,232,088 97.97% $ 637,105,359 98.73% 

FY2004 $ 1.5000 $ 0.1137 $ 1.6137 $ 40,163,473,828 $ 625,646,692 $ 615,576,354 98.39% $ 615,450,009 ** 98.37% 

FY2005 $ 1.5000 $ 0.1230 $ 1.6230 $ 37,029,373,733 $ 627,875,845 $ 615,107,399 97.97% $ 620,113,860 98.76% 

FY2006 $ 1.5000 $ 0.1230 $ 1.6230 $ 38,942,363,722 $ 660,847,938 $ 650,259,016 98.40% $ 655,751,207 99.23% 

FY2007 $ 1.3700 $ 0.1230 $ 1.4930 $ 44,977,962,403 $ 703,429,341 $ 693,467,966 98.58% $ 698,376,009 99.28% 

FY2008 $ 1.0400 $ 0.1230 $ 1.1630 $ 50,570,268,178 $ 615,951,380 $ 607,501,666 98.63% $ 610,922,550 99.18% 

FY2009 $ 1.0790 $ 0.1230 $ 1.2020 $ 56,266,583,957 $ 707,212,375 $ 697,204,000 98.58% $ 700,653,997 99.07% 

FY2010 $ 1.0790 $ 0.1230 $ 1.2020 $ 58,749,409,539 $ 740,792,902 $ 727,171,963 98.16% $ 730,884,132 * 98.66% 

FY2011 $ 1.0790 $ 0.1480 $ 1.2270 $ 56,280,681,272 $ 733,690,916 $ 723,927,282 98.67% $ 728,789,212 * 99.33% 

FY2012 $ 1.0790 $ 0.1630 $ 1.2420 $ 56,875,444,136 $ 751,534,334 $ 741,458,395 98.66% $ 733,914,932 97.66% 

FY2013 $ 1.0790 $ 0.1630 $ 1.2420 $ 59,110,581,643 $ 771,753,024 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

* Estimated 

** Delinquent tax collection included a negative adjustment of $45,218 

Table 93 


2012 Top Ten Taxpayers (Real and Personal Properties Included) 

Name of Taxpayer Nature of Property 2012 Taxable Value 

Percent of Net 

Taxable Valuation 

TPG-300 West 6th Street LLC Real Estate 550,839,908 0.93% 

Columbia St Davids Health Care Health Care 469,135,119 0.79% 

Freescale Semiconductor Inc Electronics Manufacturer 328,346,199 0.56% 

IBM Corporation Electronics Manufacturer 240,007,154 0.41% 

CJUF II Stratus Block 21 LLC Real Estate 154,642,842 0.26% 

H E Butt Grocery Company LP Grocery Company 134,197,978 0.23% 

National Instruments Corportion Electronics Manufacturer 132,970,356 0.22% 

SW Bell Telephone Telephone Utility 130,219,401 0.22% 

Advanced Micro Devices Inc Electronics Manufacturer 122,106,951 0.21% 

Home Depot USA Inc Retail Company 112,561,758 0.19% 

$ 2,375,027,666 4.02% 

Source: Travis Central Appraisal District 

Net Freeze Adjusted Taxable Value $59,110,581,643 


September 

2012 375

Student Information 

The district employs an independent professional demographer to analyze and update the total student 

enrollment projection for several years into the future. The demographer researches the latest trends in 

housing, birth rates, building permits, developer plats and any other pertinent demographic information. 

The information from these reports become an integral part of the district’s decision making and planning 

process for capital improvement needs and campus boundary changes. The below table presents student 

enrollment history for the last ten years and projections for the next five years. 

Table 94 


Student Enrollment History and Projections 

94,000 

92,000 

90,000 

88,000 

86,000 

84,000 

82,000 

80,000 

78,759 

79,896 

81,295 

82,063 

82,739 

83,033 

88,978 

86,724 87,336 

85,273 

84,245 

90,186 

91,777 

93,140 

78,000 

76,000 

78,408 


Est 

FY2014 

Est 

FY2015 

Est 

FY2016 FY2017 

Est Est 


September 

2012 376

Table 95 


Student Enrollment Five Year History by Campus 

Campus Name/Number 

FY2009 

Actual 

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Projected 


Projected 

High Schools 

Akins 017 2,588 2,650 2,655 2,733 2,696 

Anderson 009 2,084 1,984 2,089 2,045 2,048 

Austin 002 2,290 2,350 2,287 2,252 2,199 

Bowie 013 2,752 2,805 2,874 2,892 2,878 

Crockett 008 1,809 1,732 1,642 1,561 1,557 

Eastside Memorial 019 - - - 633 652 

Global Tech 020 - 202 260 - - 

Green Tech 019 531 443 405 - - 

International 029 217 237 180 136 150 

Lanier 004 1,525 1,433 1,510 1,671 1,668 

Lanier Graduation Pathways 026 - - - - 120 

LASA 018 858 870 878 942 927 

LBJ Comprehensive 014 1,007 977 952 909 929 

McCallum 005 1,703 1,751 1,775 1,762 1,766 

Reagan 006 885 866 806 1,024 1,038 

Richards SYWL 028 332 437 526 618 715 

Travis 007 1,405 1,332 1,339 1,473 1,521 

Travis Garduation Pathways 025 - - - - 120 

High School Total 19,986 20,069 20,178 20,651 20,984 

Middle Schools 

Bailey 059 1,203 956 1,035 988 973 

Bedichek 054 1,115 1,021 1,052 1,026 1,051 

Burnet 046 917 960 994 1,030 1,048 

Covington 057 954 951 807 732 700 

Dobie 055 570 597 615 666 741 

Fulmore 043 1,040 1,010 990 1,043 1,040 

Garcia 056 656 693 662 421 513 

Gorzycki 062 - 834 963 1,077 1,090 

Kealing 044 1,260 1,240 1,223 1,215 1,205 

Lamar 045 780 663 598 564 599 

Martin 051 746 677 646 598 534 

Mendez 058 888 865 879 999 1,041 

Murchison 052 1,161 1,244 1,274 1,360 1,383 

O. Henry 047 974 1,004 1,026 1,028 1,037 

Paredes 061 947 889 933 1,032 1,086 

Pearce 048 519 457 329 544 563 

Small 060 1,183 949 951 925 955 

Webb 053 519 572 580 662 735 

Middle School Total 15,432 15,582 15,557 15,910 16,294 


September 

2012 377





FY2009 

Actual 

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Projected 


Projected 

Elementary Schools 

Allan 142 384 388 379 365 - 

Allison 101 512 529 555 527 536 

Andrews 102 620 572 701 715 723 

Baldwin - - 506 650 681 

Baranoff 182 854 852 873 955 984 

Barrington 149 871 926 994 1,104 774 

Barton Hills 103 372 375 388 391 377 

Becker 104 192 189 208 280 306 

Blackshear 105 265 241 247 239 238 

Blanton 106 536 560 588 580 580 

Blazier 185 607 727 776 854 895 

Boone 170 555 485 501 508 524 

Brentwood 107 447 477 488 518 528 

Brooke 108 410 414 433 408 402 

Brown 109 519 502 521 494 482 

Bryker Woods 110 400 400 405 379 377 

Campbell 111 379 393 360 316 316 

Casey 173 665 656 673 643 636 

Casis 112 829 815 821 846 857 

Clayton 184 985 970 871 885 873 

Cook 161 904 900 908 955 965 

Cowan 183 704 742 781 790 808 

Cunningham 113 537 556 513 490 480 

Davis 179 620 703 676 687 696 

Dawson 114 333 333 329 340 342 

Doss 154 672 721 774 790 816 

Galindo 176 717 719 701 677 676 

Govalle 116 414 402 400 478 587 

Graham 159 617 658 755 818 755 

Gullett 117 482 527 540 564 572 

Harris 118 710 737 758 728 734 

Hart 163 822 850 892 961 840 

Highland Park 119 600 634 660 648 657 

Hill 155 707 691 735 769 794 

Houston 162 941 958 920 898 882 

IDEA Allan Academy (K-5) 192 - - - - 244 

Jordan 178 736 810 831 848 763 

Joslin 120 336 323 362 320 330 

Kiker 180 711 907 932 945 952 

Kocurek 172 677 639 663 659 669 


September 

2012 378





FY2009 

Actual 

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Projected 


Projected 

83,033 84,996 

Elementary Schools, continued 

Langford 168 843 843 847 807 807 

Lee 121 406 441 427 403 396 

Linder 160 877 836 882 866 758 

Maplewood 122 367 420 405 428 453 

Mathews 123 411 391 410 392 400 

McBee 165 740 806 757 760 747 

Menchaca 147 631 698 675 698 713 

Metz 124 544 491 503 521 529 

Mills 181 1,058 1,097 932 912 882 

Norman 150 382 314 326 335 307 

Oak Hill 148 951 993 757 758 763 

Oak Springs 125 319 303 284 291 300 

Odom 156 712 688 663 678 678 

Ortega 126 257 284 295 285 399 

Overton 189 652 716 655 780 709 

Palm 171 666 661 603 555 543 

Patton 143 732 765 922 996 997 

Pease 128 254 251 257 256 270 

Pecan Springs 129 505 523 541 463 461 

Perez 190 700 800 881 904 950 

Pickle 164 715 722 734 757 760 

Pillow 151 568 648 657 672 688 

Pleasant Hill 130 629 623 618 610 623 

Read Pre-K 131 556 481 510 471 479 

Reilly 132 274 304 302 324 418 

Ridgetop 133 196 188 220 292 315 

Rodriguez 174 977 955 922 944 824 

Sanchez 127 608 617 597 587 287 

Sims 139 401 314 275 310 571 

St. Elmo 136 357 347 304 287 291 

Summitt 138 702 747 850 751 781 

Sunset Valley 158 443 464 444 499 505 

Travis Heights 140 564 525 540 540 549 

Uphaus 177 - - - - 240 

Walnut Creek 141 764 901 928 930 948 

Widen 175 822 804 782 747 739 

Williams 166 691 668 634 618 606 

Winn 157 425 440 480 394 384 

Wooldridge 152 839 881 878 909 914 

Wooten 144 675 682 703 674 675 

Zavala 145 435 388 410 418 411 

Zilker 146 497 520 523 530 548 

Elementary School Total 46,787 47,821 48,751 49,374 49,269 


September 

2012 379





FY2009 

Actual 

FY 2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Projected 


Projected 

Special Schools 

ACES- Alternative Center for Elementary 115 22 19 20 - - 

ALC-Alternative Learning Center 012 209 181 198 159 159 

Leadership Academy 035 56 54 64 39 39 

Phoenix Academy 032 37 31 30 31 31 

Travis County Day School 027 16 15 16 24 24 

Travis County J J A E P 036 19 15 17 7 7 

Travis County Juvenile Detention Center 030 83 63 50 23 23 

Austin State Hospital 250 21 15 16 21 21 

Garza Independence 015 245 234 226 181 287 

Rosedale 251 120 146 150 287 181 

Virtual School Pilot - - - 17 17 

Special School Total 828 773 787 789 789 

All School Totals 

High Schools 19,986 20,069 20,178 20,651 20,984 

Middle Schools 15,432 15,582 15,557 15,910 16,294 

Elementary Schools 46,787 47,821 48,751 49,374 49,269 

Special Schools 828 773 787 789 789 

Grand Totals 83,033 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 


September 

2012 380

Table 96 


District Fact Sheet 

Actual Actual Actual Adopted Adopted 


Enrollment 83,033 84,245 85,273 86,929 87,336 

ADA 75,607 76,727 77,982 78,189 81,210 

WADA 99,654 101,464 103,314 97,353 105,842 

% Economically Disadvantaged 63% 64% 64% 63% 63% 

CAD Net Taxable Value (1) 56,266,583,957 58,749,409,539 56,280,681,272 56,875,444,136 59,110,581,643 

per Enrollee 677,641 697,364 660,006 654,275 676,818 

per ADA 744,203 765,697 721,714 727,410 727,873 

per WADA 564,622 579,017 544,754 584,219 558,479 

CPTD Assigned Value (2) 53,030,915,597 58,956,096,148 59,809,375,140 59,878,940,779 59,894,061,109 

Local Revenue - General Fund 640,980,065 664,832,840 653,112,865 638,484,837 677,368,777 

per Enrollee 7,720 7,892 7,659 7,345 7,756 

per ADA 8,478 8,665 8,375 8,166 8,341 

per WADA 6,432 6,552 6,322 6,558 6,400 

Recapture - General Fund 177,664,513 111,937,679 123,774,675 135,176,524 111,739,859 

per Enrollee 2,140 1,329 1,452 1,555 1,279 

per ADA 2,350 1,459 1,587 1,729 1,376 

per WADA 1,783 1,103 1,198 1,389 1,056 

State Entitlement - General Fund 216,153,230 126,019,476 162,678,023 170,302,248 110,259,107 

per Enrollee 2,603 1,496 1,908 1,959 1,262 

per ADA 2,859 1,642 2,086 2,178 1,358 

per WADA 2,169 1,242 1,575 1,749 1,042 

Operating Expenditures (3) - All Funds 794,979,625 809,502,593 809,502,593 730,229,712 711,436,572 

per Enrollee 9,574 9,609 9,493 8,400 8,146 

per ADA 10,515 10,550 10,381 9,339 8,760 

per WADA 7,977 7,978 7,835 7,501 6,722 

Debt Service Expenditures 70,042,139 80,202,659 88,634,106 95,920,379 102,744,114 

per Enrollee 844 952 1,039 1,103 1,176 

per ADA 926 1,045 1,137 1,227 1,265 

per WADA 703 790 858 985 971 

Operating Tax Rate 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 1.079 

Debt Service Tax Rate 0.120 0.123 0.148 0.016 0.016 

Total Tax Rate 1.202 1.202 1.227 1.242 1.242 

Tax Yield per penny (TEA Summary of Finance) 

Total Tax Yield per Penny 5,829,050 6,080,567 5,944,725 5,943,161 5,873,390 

per Enrollee 70.20 72.18 69.71 68.37 67.25 

per ADA 77.10 79.25 76.23 76.01 72.32 

per WADA 58.49 59.93 57.54 61.05 55.49 

Pupil/Teacher Ratio 14.10 14.10 13.99 15.21 14.62 

Pupil/Staff Ratio 7.33 7.28 7.26 7.80 7.60 

General Fund Balance 146,235,297 172,135,104 218,665,742 248,072,693 220,095,782 

Governmental Funds Balance 180,169,409 202,291,083 249,470,708 277,672,346 248,650,357 

Notes: 

(1) Certified Net Taxable Value provided by the Travis County Appraisal District annually on July 25th 

(2) Value assigned by the Comptroller's Property Tax Division and listed on TEA Summary of Finance 

(3) Operating Expenditures exclude the following expenditures: 

*Object 6500 Debt Service and Object 6600 Capital Outlay - Land Buildings, and Equipment, Function 61 Community Services, 

*Functions 71 Debt Service, 81 Facilities Acquisition & Construction, 91 Contracted Instructional Services between Public Schools (Recapture), 

*Functions 93 Payments for Shared Services, and 99 Other Intergovernmental Charges 


September 

2012 381

Staffing 

As with most school districts anywhere in Texas, the annual operating budget is labor intensive with 

approximately 87% of its budget going toward salary and benefits. To control the cost of operations, 

school district must control labor costs. 

The district must balance efficiency with effectiveness. The larger the staffing ratio is, the greater the 

overall efficiency will be. The district’s administration must continually evaluate staffing issues during the 

budgeting process. Each year staffing changes are made to more effectively operate the district. 

Preliminary teacher staffing formulas for FY2013 will remain unchanged from the FY2012 school year. 

Elementary class size caps will remain as follows: PK (20:1), K-4 (22:1), and 5-6 (30:1). Secondary class 

sizes are targeted at an approximate level of 29 per class, based on teaching a 6 out of 8 schedule. 

Student enrollment gradually grew over the last 5 years with an average rate of 1.22% each year. During 

the same period of time the total staff grew by 0.73%. 

Teachers 

(Include regular Elementary and Secondary, and Special 

Program Teachers) 

Table 97 


Staffing History 

FY2008 

Actual 

FY2009 

Actual 

FY2010 

Actual 

FY2011 

Actual 

FY2012 

Projected 


Projected 

5,835 5,889 5,976 6,094 5,714 5,974 

Professional 

(Include Superintendent, Area Chiefs, Assistant 

Superintendents, Director, Principals, Assistant Principals, 

Counselors, Librarians, and Nurses) 

Other 

(Include Educational Aides and Non Classroom 

Paraprofessional, Bus Drivers, Hourly Employees, and Other) 

1,385 1,459 1,503 1,516 1,489 1,482 

3,880 3,974 4,092 4,128 3,948 4,032 

Total 11,100 11,322 11,571 11,738 11,151 11,488 

Student Enrollment 82,181 83,033 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 

Staffing Ratios 

Student/Teacher Ratio 14.08 14.10 14.10 13.99 15.18 14.62 

Student/Total Staff Ratio 7.40 7.33 7.28 7.26 7.78 7.60 


September 

2012 382

Table 98 


Teacher by Highest Degree Held 

AISD Compared to State for FY2011 (Latest Data Available) 

Austin ISD 

Bachelors 

74.09% 

Masters 

24.74% 

Doctorate 

0.71% 

No Degree 

0.46% 

State of Texas 

Masters 

21.84% 

Bachelors 

76.85% 

Doctorate 

0.54% 

No Degree 

0.77% 


September 

2012 383

Table 99 


Teacher by Years of Experience 

AISD Compared to State for FY2011 (Latest Data Available) 


11-20 Years 

23.47% 

20+ Years 

18.06% 

6-10 Years 

19.97% 

0 Years 

5.55% 

1-5 Years 

32.95% 

State of Texas 

11-20 Years 

24.98% 

20+ Years 

17.92% 

6-10 Years 

21.07% 

0 Years 

6.05% 

1-5 Years 

29.98% 


September 

2012 384

Future Year Budget Projections 

Assumptions: 

1. The Foundation School Program (FSP) entitles AISD and all school districts in Texas to provide 

basic education for each student. The 82 nd Texas Legislature applied funding cuts in SB1 to 

address state budget shortfalls; subsequently, Austin ISD lost a total of $96.6 million this fiscal 

biennium. It is anticipated that the 2013 legislative session will enact more changes in state 

funding formulas, which may impact the district’s FSP for the next biennium, FY2014 and 

FY2015. But, it is difficult to speculate future state cuts and apply in forecast models. 

2. The district shall maintain an unassigned Fund Balance sufficiently adequate for fiscal cash 

liquidity purposes (i.e., fiscal reserve) that will provide for sufficient cash flow to minimize the 

potential of short-term tax anticipation borrowing. This amount shall be equal to but not less than 

14% of the combined budgeted expenditures of the district General Fund. 

3. The FY2013 and future year M&O tax rate 

projections are based on the current adopted 

rate of $1.079 per $100 of assessed taxable 

value. If voters approved an increase to the M&O 

tax rate in a tax ratification election, projected 

revenues for future years would increase. 

4. In FY2013, the revenue per WADA used to 

calculate the district's entitlement funding was 

significantly reduced from a FY2012 rate of 

$6,101 per WADA to $5,633 in FY2013. 

5. Salary increases are included in FY2013, but no 

additional salary projections are included in 

future years. 

The Goddess of Liberty pictured right, 

stands atop the rotunda of the Texas 

State Capitol building. 


September 

2012 385

Table 100 


Projection of Revenue, Expenditures and Fund Balance for General Fund 

General Fund 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 

Actual Actual Adopted Adopted Projected Projected Projected 

Enrollment 84,245 85,273 86,724 87,336 88,978 90,186 91,777 

Enrollment-Revised 86,732 86,904 87,078 87,252 

Average Daily Attendance (ADA) 76,726 77,981 78,945 80,327 79,618 79,777 79,937 

Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) 101,464 103,314 98,901 103,758 103,921 104,129 104,337 

Hold Harmless Revenue per WADA 6,101 6,103 6,101 5,633 5,634 5,634 5,634 

Comptroller's Property Tax Division Value (CPTD) 58,956,096,148 61,899,156,368 59,878,940,779 60,654,383,629 63,438,664,301 64,707,437,587 64,707,437,587 

Estimated Value for Tax Levy Purposes $ 58,749,409,539 $ 56,280,681,272 $ 56,875,444,136 $59,110,581,643 $61,002,210,620 $62,330,254,832 $63,687,184,480 

Wealth Per WADA at Compressed Rate $ 476,500 $ 476,500 $ 476,500 $ 476,500 $ 476,500 $ 476,500 $ 476,500 

Wealth Per WADA Above Compressed Rate plus 6 cents $ 319,500 $ 319,500 $ 319,500 $ 319,500 $ 319,500 $ 319,500 $ 319,500 

M & O Tax Rate per $100 Taxable Value 1.0790 1.0790 1.0790 1.0790 1.0790 1.0790 1.0790 

Revenue 

Property Tax Revenue $ 652,782,885 $ 637,062,884 $ 627,260,426 $ 663,763,869 $ 683,970,439 $ 698,156,740 $ 713,355,612 

Prior Year Tax Revenue $ 3,339,283 $ 4,308,521 $ 3,200,000 $ 4,436,915 $ 4,436,915 $ 4,436,915 $ 4,436,915 

Penalty and Interests $ 3,335,172 $ 3,296,161 $ 3,100,000 $ 3,394,387 $ 3,394,387 $ 3,394,387 $ 3,394,387 

Interest Income $ 554,266 $ 692,699 $ 600,000 $ 401,630 $ 401,630 $ 407,654 $ 407,654 

Other Local Revenue $ 4,821,234 $ 7,752,600 $ 4,324,411 $ 5,371,976 $ 5,290,047 $ 5,358,442 $ 5,358,442 

Foundation School Fund $ 89,130,638 $ 109,384,215 $ 121,088,928 $ 33,053,978 $ 65,163,780 $ 64,608,230 $ 64,728,205 

Available School Fund $ 9,075,326 $ 25,432,653 $ 19,081,728 $ 47,073,537 $ 19,664,116 $ 19,703,465 $ 19,703,465 

Other State Revenue $ 391,613 $ 412,215 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 

TRS On Behalf Payment $ 27,421,899 $ 27,448,940 $ 30,031,592 $ 30,031,592 $ 30,031,592 $ 30,031,592 $ 30,031,592 

State Stabilization Funding $ 22,187,440 $ 24,280,941 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

School Health and Related $ 13,551,585 $ 15,596,596 $ 13,500,000 $ 18,023,989 $ 18,023,989 $ 18,023,989 $ 18,023,989 

Education Jobs Grant $ - $ - $ 13,798,672 $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

Other Federal Revenue $ 2,480,830 $ 2,554,754 $ 1,787,000 $ 2,362,595 $ 2,362,595 $ 2,362,595 $ 2,362,595 

Total Revenue $ 829,072,171 $ 858,223,179 $ 837,872,757 $ 808,014,468 $ 832,839,490 $ 846,584,009 $ 861,902,856 

Projected Expenditures $ 803,260,046 $ 811,699,171 $ 838,500,731 $ 835,961,379 $ 872,995,292 $ 891,160,010 $ 908,534,259 

Net Other Sources (Uses) $ 87,675 $ 6,638 $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) $ (30,000) 

Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance $ 25,899,800 $ 46,530,646 $ (657,974) $ (27,976,911) $ (40,185,802) $ (44,606,001) $ (46,661,403) 

Estimated Outstanding Purchase Orders at Year End $ 30,064,925 

Beginning Fund Balance $ 146,235,297 $ 172,135,096 $ 218,665,742 * $ 248,072,693 $ 220,095,782 $ 179,909,980 $ 135,303,979 

Ending Fund Balance $ 172,135,096 $ 218,665,742 $ 248,072,693 $ 220,095,782 $ 179,909,980 $ 135,303,979 $ 88,642,576 

Less Assigned Fund Balance $ (23,808,573) $ (39,038,247) $ (48,983,942) $ (35,530,274) $ (33,060,330) $ (36,266,644) 

Ending Fund Balance - Unassigned $ 148,326,523 $ 179,627,495 $ 199,088,751 $ 184,565,508 $ 146,849,650 $ 99,037,335 $ 88,642,576 

Ending Fund Balance as % of Total Budget Expenditures 21.43% 26.94% 29.59% 26.33% 20.61% 15.18% 9.76% 


September 

2012 386

Table 101 


Projection of Revenue, Expenditures and Fund Balance for Debt Service and Food Service Funds 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 



I & S Tax Rate per $100 Taxable Value 0.1230 0.1480 0.1630 0.1630 0.1630 0.1630 0.1630 

Revenue 

Taxes - Current and Prior Years $ 74,389,079 $ 87,334,669 $ 94,505,938 $ 100,272,021 $ 103,324,543 $ 105,467,608 $ 106,983,597 

Taxes - Prior Years $ 372,885 $ 486,876 $ 325,000 $ 425,000 $ 325,000 $ 325,000 $ 325,000 

Penalty & Interest $ 377,582 $ 412,842 $ 330,000 $ 400,000 $ 330,000 $ 330,000 $ 330,000 

Interest Earnings $ 284,511 $ 307,657 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 

Building America Bond Subsidy $ - $ 886,020 $ - $ 984,466 $ 984,466 $ 984,466 $ 984,466 

Total Revenue $ 75,424,057 $ 89,428,064 $ 95,360,938 $ 102,281,487 $ 105,164,009 $ 107,307,074 $ 108,823,063 

Projected Debt Service Expenditures $ 80,202,659 $ 88,634,106 $ 95,920,379 $ 102,744,114 $ 101,381,083 $ 104,454,820 $ 105,611,496 

Net Other Sources (Uses) $ 112,393 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 

- 

Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance $ (4,666,209) $ 793,958 $ (559,441) $ (462,627) $ 3,782,926 $ 2,852,254 $ 3,211,567 

Beginning Fund Balance $ 25,271,334 $ 20,605,125 $ 21,399,083 $ 20,839,642 $ 20,377,015 $ 24,159,941 $ 27,012,195 


Ending Fund Balance as % of Total Budget 25.69% 24.14% 21.73% 19.83% 23.83% 25.86% 28.62% 


Revenue 

2009-10 2010-11 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 2014-15 2014-15 


Local Sources $ 7,827,956 $ 7,624,437 $ 8,226,536 $ 8,392,715 $ 8,560,569 $ 8,731,781 $ 8,906,416 

State Sources $ 1,063,672 $ 1,125,924 $ 1,146,327 $ 1,146,327 $ 1,146,327 $ 1,146,327 $ 1,146,327 

Federal Sources $ 28,338,890 $ 29,610,386 $ 29,831,027 $ 30,675,778 $ 31,534,700 $ 32,417,671 $ 33,325,366 

Total Revenue $ 37,230,518 $ 38,360,747 $ 39,203,890 $ 40,214,820 $ 41,241,596 $ 42,295,779 $ 43,378,109 

Projected Food Service Expenditures $ 36,342,434 $ 38,505,721 $ 39,849,762 $ 40,797,276 $ 41,776,411 $ 42,779,044 $ 43,805,742 

Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance $ 888,084 $ (144,974) $ (645,872) $ (582,456) $ (534,815) $ (483,265) $ (427,632) 

Beginning Fund Balance $ 8,662,778 $ 9,550,862 $ 9,405,888 $ 8,760,016 $ 8,177,560 $ 7,642,745 $ 7,159,480 


Ending Fund Balance as % of Total Budget 26.28% 24.43% 21.98% 20.04% 18.29% 16.74% 15.37% 


September 

2012 387

Buildings and Square Footage 

Table 102 


Schedule of Buildings and Square Footage 

Initial Year 

of Service 

Building 

Square 

Footage 

Number of 

Portables 

Portable 

Square 

Footage 

Totals 

Square 

Footage 

Building 

High Schools 

017 Akins 2000 349,843 23 35,328 385,171 

009 Anderson 1973 321,412 1 1,536 322,948 

028 Ann Richards SWYL 1958 123,796 3 4,608 128,404 

002 Austin 1975 330,759 5 7,680 338,439 

013 Bowie 1988 440,578 13 19,968 460,546 

008 Crockett 1968 345,799 8 12,288 358,087 

019 Eastside Memorial 1960 253,815 2 3,072 256,887 

029 International 1960 25,000 0 0 25,000 

004 Lanier/Lanier Pathways 1966 280,242 13 19,968 300,210 

014 LASA / LBJ Comprehensive 1974 293,046 9 13,824 306,870 

005 McCallum 1953 251,287 5 7,680 258,967 

006 Reagan 1965 274,018 2 3,072 277,090 

007 Travis/Travis Pathways 1953 277,906 4 5,376 283,282 

High School Totals 3,567,501 88 134,400 3,701,901 

Middle Schools 

59 Bailey 1993 147,444 7 10,752 158,196 

54 Bedichek 1972 140,875 17 26,112 166,987 

46 Burnet 1961 139,248 12 18,432 157,680 

57 Covington 1986 172,364 3 4,608 176,972 

55 Dobie 1972 133,675 3 4,608 138,283 

43 Fulmore 1911 156,804 4 6,144 162,948 

56 Garcia 2007 161,147 0 0 161,147 

62 Gorzycki 2009 169,045 0 0 169,045 

44 Kealing 1986 196,674 0 0 196,674 

45 Lamar 1955 130,714 3 4,608 135,322 

51 Martin 1967 113,766 7 10,752 124,518 

58 Mendez 1987 173,382 9 13,824 187,206 

52 Murchison 1967 135,534 11 16,896 152,430 

47 O.Henry 1953 141,413 5 7,680 149,093 

61 Paredes 1999 143,037 4 6,144 149,181 

48 Pearce 1958 132,596 1 1,536 134,132 

60 Small 1999 160,608 3 4,608 165,216 

53 Webb 1968 120,985 6 9,216 130,201 

Middle School Totals 2,669,312 95 145,920 2,815,232 


September 

2012 388




Initial Year 

of Service 

Building 

Square 

Footage 

Number of 

Portables 

Portable 

Square 

Footage 

Totals 

Square 

Footage 

Building 

Elementary Schools 

101 Allison 1955 61,426 5 7,680 69,106 

102 Andrews 1962 60,032 9 13,824 73,856 

187 Baldwin 2010 86,896 0 0 86,896 

182 Baranoff 1999 80,088 4 6,144 86,232 

149 Barrington 1969 75,385 14 21,504 96,889 

103 Barton Hills 1964 38,290 7 10,752 49,042 

104 Becker 1936 61,528 2 3,072 64,600 

105 Blackshear 1903 70,071 0 0 70,071 

106 Blanton 1964 71,609 6 9,216 80,825 

185 Blazier 2007 82,897 7 10,752 93,649 

170 Boone 1986 72,858 0 0 72,858 

107 Brentwood 1951 62,890 2 3,072 65,962 

108 Brooke 1954 51,588 3 3,840 55,428 

109 Brown 1957 54,822 6 9,216 64,038 

110 BrykerWoods 1939 37,499 6 8,448 45,947 

111 Campbell 1992 61,322 1 1,536 62,858 

173 Casey 1999 81,506 1 1,536 83,042 

112 Casis 1951 77,061 9 13,824 90,885 

184 Clayton 2006 99,883 4 6,144 106,027 

161 Cook 1974 67,355 11 16,896 84,251 

183 Cowan 2000 70,234 6 9,216 79,450 

113 Cunningham 1962 71,191 4 6,144 77,335 

179 Davis 1992 71,734 3 4,608 76,342 

114 Dawson 1954 59,904 4 5,376 65,280 

154 Doss 1970 60,521 8 12,288 72,809 

176 Galindo 1988 85,513 6 8,448 93,961 

116 Govalle 1940 75,468 0 0 75,468 

159 Graham 1972 72,031 7 10,752 82,783 

117 Gullett 1956 39,826 8 11,520 51,346 

118 Harris 1955 55,794 7 10,752 66,546 

163 Hart 1998 81,042 9 13,824 94,866 

119 Highland Park 1952 58,557 6 9,216 67,773 

155 Hill 1970 69,626 6 9,216 78,842 

162 Houston 1976 80,229 10 15,360 95,589 

142 IDEA at Allan K-5 1957 111,937 0 0 111,937 

178 Jordan 1992 73,898 8 12,288 86,186 

120 Joslin 1954 44,829 5 7,680 52,509 

180 Kiker 1992 74,156 10 15,360 89,516 

172 Kocurek 1986 76,346 1 1,536 77,882 

168 Langford 1980 77,748 11 16,896 94,644 


September 

2012 389




Initial Year 

of Service 

Building 

Square 

Footage 

Number of 

Portables 

Portable 

Square 

Footage 

Totals 

Square 

Footage 

Building 

Elementary Schools, continued 

121 Lee 1940 47,226 1 768 47,994 

160 Linder 1972 69,544 11 16,896 86,440 

122 Maplewood 1951 45,389 6 9,216 54,605 

123 Mathews 1916 42,124 3 3,840 45,964 

165 McBee 2000 69,716 6 9,216 78,932 

147 Menchaca 1975 60,005 6 9,216 69,221 

124 Metz 1992 61,356 2 3,072 64,428 

181 Mills 1998 81,368 8 12,288 93,656 

150 Norman 1970 58,519 1 1,536 60,055 

148 Oak Hill 1974 75,143 7 10,752 85,895 

125 Oak Springs 1958 47,102 3 4,608 51,710 

156 Odom 1970 61,009 9 13,824 74,833 

126 Ortega 1959 47,301 2 3,072 50,373 

189 Overton 2007 88,013 7 10,752 98,765 

171 Palm 1986 78,101 2 3,072 81,173 

143 Patton 1985 76,213 8 12,288 88,501 

128 Pease 1876 35,623 0 0 35,623 

129 Pecan Springs 1957 59,810 4 6,144 65,954 

190 Perez 2006 82,223 10 15,360 97,583 

164 Pickle 2001 116,427 4 6,144 122,571 

151 Pillow 1969 54,247 7 10,752 64,999 

130 Pleasant Hill 1986 65,298 5 7,680 72,978 

131 Read Pre-k 1962 37,188 6 9,216 46,404 

132 Reilly 1954 41,646 4 6,144 47,790 

133 Ridgetop 1939 34,617 3 4,608 39,225 

174 Rodriguez 1999 79,918 10 15,360 95,278 

127 St. Elmo 1960 78,951 4 6,144 85,095 

139 Sanchez 1976 44,337 3 4,608 48,945 

136 Sims 1956 48,922 2 3,072 51,994 

138 Summitt 1986 75,903 8 12,288 88,191 

158 Sunset Valley 1971 66,467 1 1,536 68,003 

140 Travis Heights 1939 59,330 3 4,608 63,938 

177 Uphaus ECC 2012 72,000 0 0 72,000 

141 Walnut Creek 1961 79,535 11 16,896 96,431 

175 Widen 1986 74,523 9 13,824 88,347 

166 Williams 1976 64,436 6 9,216 73,652 

157 Winn 1970 60,758 2 3,072 63,830 

152 Wooldridge 1969 70,474 13 19,968 90,442 

144 Wooten 1955 53,689 12 18,432 72,121 

145 Zavala 1936 69,142 0 0 69,142 

146 Zilker 1950 53,656 7 10,752 64,408 

Elementary School Totals 5,352,838 429 658,176 6,011,014 


September 

2012 390




Initial Year 

of Service 

Building 

Square 

Footage 

Number of 

Portables 

Portable 

Square 

Footage 

Totals 

Square 

Footage 

Building 

Special Schools 

ALC 1952 86,585 6 9,216 95,801 

Garza High 1939 44,754 4 6,144 50,898 

Rosedale 1939 36,772 5 7,680 44,452 

Special School Totals 168,111 15 23,040 191,151 

Other Buildings 

Carruth Admin. Building 1984 133,321 0 0 133,321 

Baker 1911 65,868 0 0 65,868 

Burger Field 1975 177,340 0 0 177,340 

Clifton 1977 37,537 1 1,536 39,073 

Delco Activity Center 2003 60,294 0 0 60,294 

House Park 1937 31,864 0 0 31,864 

Nelson Field 1964 59,005 1 1,536 60,541 

Pleasant Hill Annex 1947 25,758 0 0 25,758 

Saegert 1977 18,003 1 1,536 19,539 

Service Center 1992 52,953 0 0 52,953 

Warehouse 1984 115,757 0 0 115,757 

Other Building Totals 777,700 3 4,608 782,308 

Grand Totals 

High Schools 3,567,501 6 9,216 130,201 

Middle Schools 2,669,312 95 145,920 2,815,232 

Elementary Schools 5,352,838 429 658,176 6,011,014 

Special Schools 168,111 15 23,040 191,151 

Other Buildings 777,700 3 4,608 782,308 

Grand Totals 12,535,461 548 840,960 9,929,905 


September 

2012 391

Benchmarks 

Each year, as the district staff prepares the annual 

budget, various comparisons are made between 

Austin ISD and local peer group districts, urban peer 

group districts, the TX Comptroller FAST peer groups 

and/or with the state at large to validate how the 

district’s resources are used. These comparisons are 

called benchmarks. 

The benchmarks also help to put into perspective 

information that people hear through the media. 

Hopefully, the reader of these tables, charts and 

graphs will be enlightened about how Austin ISD 

manages its resources. 

The following pages compare FY2011 

Academic Excellence Indicator System 

(AEIS) data between Austin ISD and the 

local peer group districts, urban peer group 

districts, FAST peer districts and the state 

as a whole. This is the latest information 

available on the Texas Education Agency 

website. The data has been condensed to 

percentages, per student costs and ratios to 

enable the reader to digest key elements of 

school district spending. 

Blackshear Elementary Students 


September 

2012 392

Austin ISD Comparison with Local Peer Group Districts 

The following pages compare FY2011 Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) data between 

Austin ISD and the local peer group districts including Del Valle, Eanes, Georgetown, Hays Consolidated, 

Lake Travis, Leander, Manor, Pflugerville and Round Rock. This is the latest data available at the time of 

print. It is anticipated the FY2012 AEIS reports will be released in late fall 2012 or early winter 2013. 

Austin ISD and Surrounding School Districts 


September 

2012 393

Student Group 

Table 103 


FY2011 Local Peer Group Comparison of Student Groups 

AUSTIN ISD DEL VALLE ISD EANES ISD GEORGETOWN 


HAYS CISD 

LAKE TRAVIS 


LEANDER ISD MANOR ISD PFLUGERVILLE 


ROUND ROCK 


All Students # 85,273 10,673 7,691 10,411 15,262 6,940 32,034 7,173 22,657 44,590 

Bilingual # of students 23,740 3,330 166 1,112 2,095 380 1,570 2,260 3,964 3,632 

Bilingual % of students 27.84% 31.20% 2.16% 10.68% 13.73% 5.48% 4.90% 31.51% 17.50% 8.15% 

Bilingual Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.02 2.24 0.15 0.67 0.95 0.41 0.38 2.36 1.51 0.65 

CATE # of students 17,265 2,035 1,144 2,143 2,843 1,351 4,079 1,738 4,413 11,594 

CATE % of students 20.25% 19.07% 14.87% 20.58% 18.63% 19.47% 12.73% 24.23% 19.48% 26.00% 

CATE Students to Total Staff Ratio 1.47 1.37 1.04 1.28 1.29 1.45 0.98 1.81 1.68 2.07 

Economically Disadvantaged # of students 54,550 9,271 206 4,780 7,465 1,015 7,220 5,696 11,656 13,339 

Economically Disadvantaged % of students 63.97% 86.86% 2.68% 45.91% 48.91% 14.63% 22.54% 79.41% 51.45% 29.91% 

Economically Disadvantaged Students to Total Staff Ratio 4.65 6.23 0.19 2.86 3.38 1.09 1.74 5.94 4.44 2.38 

Gifted & Talented # of students 5,385 359 976 920 1,296 851 4,620 476 1,863 3,618 

Gifted & Talented % of students 6.32% 3.36% 12.69% 8.84% 8.49% 12.26% 14.42% 6.64% 8.22% 8.11% 

Gifted & Talented Students to Total Staff Ratio 0.46 0.24 0.89 0.55 0.59 0.91 1.11 0.50 0.71 0.64 

LEP # of students 24,435 3,420 187 1,222 2,178 390 1,582 2,267 4,056 3,615 

LEP % of students 28.66% 32.04% 2.43% 11.74% 14.27% 5.62% 4.94% 31.60% 17.90% 8.11% 

LEP Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.08 2.30 0.17 0.73 0.98 0.42 0.38 2.36 1.55 0.64 

Special Education # of students 8,164 1,047 571 843 1,349 465 2,956 565 2,107 3,326 

Special Education % of students 9.57% 9.81% 7.42% 8.10% 8.84% 6.70% 9.23% 7.88% 9.30% 7.46% 

Special Education Students to Total Staff Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.52 0.51 0.61 0.50 0.71 0.59 0.80 0.59 

Total Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $9,493 $8,704 $9,554 $9,284 $8,220 $8,594 $8,168 $8,315 $7,930 $7,995 

Non Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $3,638 $3,958 $9,381 $2,526 $1,800 $7,403 $3,772 $1,059 $1,829 $4,392 

Total Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $13,131 $12,662 $18,935 $11,809 $10,020 $15,997 $11,940 $9,374 $9,759 $12,387 


September 

2012 394

Staff 

Table 104 


FY2011 General Fund Local Peer Group Comparison of Staffing 



HAYS CISD LAKE TRAVIS ISD LEANDER ISD MANOR ISD PFLUGERVILLE 


ROUND ROCK ISD 

All Staff Tot FTE # 11,735.83 1,489.13 1,097.03 1,668.77 2,211.67 932.57 4,158.92 959.10 2,623.95 5,612.30 

Aux Tot FTE # 3,277.53 406.75 280.21 475.70 728.37 268.88 935.59 133.63 368.61 1,272.91 

Aux Tot FTE Pct 27.93% 27.32% 25.54% 28.51% 32.93% 28.83% 22.50% 13.93% 14.05% 22.68% 

Central Admin Tot FTE # 72.47 7.00 10.50 19.00 35.99 14.00 47.50 14.00 36.00 43.97 

Central Admin Tot FTE Pct 0.62% 0.47% 0.96% 1.14% 1.63% 1.50% 1.14% 1.46% 1.37% 0.78% 

Educ Aide Tot FTE # 849.95 103.27 91.92 165.68 136.07 94.68 329.40 83.36 318.71 558.55 

Educ Aide Tot FTE Pct 7.24% 6.93% 8.38% 9.93% 6.15% 10.15% 7.92% 8.69% 12.15% 9.95% 

School Admin Tot FTE # 461.50 52.44 21.26 40.89 53.64 14.61 97.35 53.33 105.29 138.00 

School Admin Tot FTE Pct 3.93% 3.52% 1.94% 2.45% 2.43% 1.57% 2.34% 5.56% 4.01% 2.46% 

Tchr Tot FTE # 6,093.62 762.65 574.33 826.15 1,042.96 474.45 2,206.39 494.09 1,502.23 3,043.93 

Tchr Tot FTE Pct 51.92% 51.21% 52.35% 49.51% 47.16% 50.88% 53.05% 51.52% 57.25% 54.24% 

Support Tot FTE # 980.77 157.01 118.81 141.35 214.63 65.95 542.68 180.70 293.11 554.94 

Support Tot FTE Pct 8.36% 10.54% 10.83% 8.47% 9.70% 7.07% 13.05% 18.84% 11.17% 9.89% 

Students to Teacher Ratio 13.99 13.99 13.39 12.60 14.63 14.63 14.52 14.52 15.08 14.65 

Students to Total Staff Ratio 7.27 7.17 7.01 6.24 6.90 7.44 7.70 7.48 8.63 7.95 

Teacher Total Base Salary Average $ 46,606 $ 47,487 $ 50,620 $ 48,246 $ 43,803 $ 48,684 $ 48,497 $ 45,563 $ 46,908 $ 48,903 


September 

2012 395

Table 105 


FY2011 Local Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code – All Funds 

Program Intent Code 






All Program Intent Code Total $ $809,496,199 $92,899,889 $73,478,005 $96,653,142 $125,456,292 $59,644,671 $261,664,319 $59,642,922 $179,681,327 $356,484,653 

11 Basic Educational Services-$ $239,140,100 $37,603,688 $33,304,625 $42,865,780 $60,618,462 $29,592,792 $126,842,631 $24,784,803 $75,888,407 $167,043,608 

11 Basic Educational Services-% 29.54% 40.48% 45.33% 44.35% 48.32% 49.62% 48.48% 41.56% 42.23% 46.86% 

21 Gifted and Talented-$ $2,800,757 $141,194 $673,286 $1,234,876 $484,849 $1,061,838 $2,448,381 $242,622 $637,463 $4,453,652 

21 Gifted and Talented-% 0.35% 0.15% 0.92% 1.28% 0.39% 1.78% 0.94% 0.41% 0.35% 1.25% 

22 Career and Technical-$ $12,234,438 $1,579,840 $926,056 $2,389,017 $2,728,501 $1,126,171 $5,253,376 $1,462,351 $3,876,860 $8,081,119 

22 Career and Technical-% 1.51% 1.70% 1.26% 2.47% 2.17% 1.89% 2.01% 2.45% 2.16% 2.27% 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-$ $129,604,588 $11,203,493 $14,229,724 $12,672,688 $13,787,035 $7,279,265 $40,027,801 $6,137,691 $29,937,043 $49,534,383 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-% 16.01% 12.06% 19.37% 13.11% 10.99% 12.20% 15.30% 10.29% 16.66% 13.90% 

24 Accelerated Education-$ $85,181,181 $10,869,233 $494,350 $468,731 $7,531,362 $1,124,354 $6,675,549 $4,317,762 $8,252,292 $8,492,514 

24 Accelerated Education-% 10.52% 11.70% 0.67% 0.48% 6.00% 1.89% 2.55% 7.24% 4.59% 2.38% 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-$ $108,889,516 $4,724,950 $411,341 $4,416,474 $1,286,993 $1,070,942 $6,363,251 $1,032,171 $3,497,171 $9,830,814 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-% 13.45% 5.09% 0.56% 4.57% 1.03% 1.80% 2.43% 1.73% 1.95% 2.76% 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-$ $2,805,536 $0 $318,915 $515,013 $678,538 $0 $15,399 $503,397 $432,377 $1,780,655 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-% 0.35% 0.00% 0.43% 0.53% 0.54% 0.00% 0.01% 0.84% 0.24% 0.50% 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-$ $3,427,162 $0 $3,955 $462,960 $420,770 $42,711 $843,405 $348,144 $843,265 $2,858,712 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-% 0.42% 0.00% 0.01% 0.48% 0.34% 0.07% 0.32% 0.58% 0.47% 0.80% 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-$ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $103,056 $151,438 $454,916 $32,696 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.04% 0.25% 0.25% 0.01% 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-$ $26,999,875 $2,138,115 $0 $4,717,559 $0 $0 $0 $2,458,527 $2,443,035 $7,746,043 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-% 3.34% 2.30% 0.00% 4.88% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.12% 1.36% 2.17% 

31 High School Allotment Program-$ $4,081,554 $414,302 $35,299 $769,633 $1,144,833 $650,766 $2,452,158 $155,105 $1,855,630 $3,689,294 

32 High School Allotment Program-% 0.50% 0.45% 0.05% 0.80% 0.91% 1.09% 0.94% 0.26% 1.03% 1.03% 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-$ $11,477,819 $961,427 $1,658,812 $1,282,168 $1,766,812 $1,774,865 $5,329,773 $743,351 $3,241,920 $5,646,137 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-% 1.42% 1.03% 2.26% 1.33% 1.41% 2.98% 2.04% 1.25% 1.80% 1.58% 

99 Undistributed-$ $182,853,673 $23,263,647 $21,421,642 $24,858,243 $35,008,137 $15,920,967 $65,309,539 $17,305,560 $48,320,948 $87,295,026 

99 Undistributed-% 22.59% 25.04% 29.15% 25.72% 27.90% 26.69% 24.96% 29.02% 26.89% 24.49% 


September 

2012 396

Function 

Table 106 


FY2011 Local Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Function – All Funds 






All Function Total $ $809,496,199 92,899,889 $73,478,005 $96,653,142 $125,456,292 $59,644,671 $261,664,319 $59,642,922 $179,681,327 $356,484,653 

11 Instruction-$ $458,494,939 $54,037,407 $42,595,481 $56,425,770 $71,775,104 $35,505,602 $150,598,362 $34,400,169 $104,350,836 $205,333,357 

11 Instruction-% 56.64% 58.17% 57.97% 58.38% 57.21% 59.53% 57.55% 57.68% 58.08% 57.60% 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-$ $13,127,763 $1,356,610 $1,108,137 $1,029,313 $2,106,746 $599,585 $4,301,448 $583,145 $2,870,773 $6,154,732 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-% 1.62% 1.46% 1.51% 1.06% 1.68% 1.01% 1.64% 0.98% 1.60% 1.73% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-$ $28,861,167 $1,299,949 $1,556,539 $433,513 $1,394,177 $598,985 $8,226,360 $1,348,773 $6,095,883 $14,561,895 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-% 3.57% 1.40% 2.12% 0.45% 1.11% 1.00% 3.14% 2.26% 3.39% 4.08% 

21 Instructional Leadership-$ $14,654,439 $1,087,909 $1,068,374 $2,786,141 $1,791,942 $387,382 $1,946,081 $1,339,314 $2,424,524 $3,663,119 

21 Instructional Leadership-% 1.81% 1.17% 1.45% 2.88% 1.43% 0.65% 0.74% 2.25% 1.35% 1.03% 

23 School Leandership-$ $50,207,567 $6,217,299 $3,168,892 $5,705,625 $6,524,057 $2,427,227 $13,034,855 $2,999,032 $9,941,106 $18,786,577 

23 School Leandership-% 6.20% 6.69% 4.31% 5.90% 5.20% 4.07% 4.98% 5.03% 5.53% 5.27% 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-$ $26,167,517 $3,034,024 $2,807,639 $3,125,837 $4,147,704 $1,996,712 $10,533,448 $1,511,649 $6,373,213 $12,648,288 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-% 3.23% 3.27% 3.82% 3.23% 3.31% 3.35% 4.03% 2.53% 3.55% 3.55% 

32 Social Work Services-$ $5,759,903 $568,113 $337,502 $372,022 $271,097 $0 $414,614 $458,371 $473,529 $800,931 

32 Social Work Services-% 0.71% 0.61% 0.46% 0.38% 0.22% 0.00% 0.16% 0.77% 0.26% 0.22% 

33 Health Services-$ $6,576,528 $914,253 $585,996 $1,198,629 $1,527,152 $471,799 $1,802,147 $673,112 $1,832,541 $3,504,701 

33 Health Services-% 0.81% 0.98% 0.80% 1.24% 1.22% 0.79% 0.69% 1.13% 1.02% 0.98% 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-$ $26,584,483 $4,171,668 $1,772,478 $3,879,257 $7,138,934 $2,153,524 $7,761,812 $2,972,735 $7,421,508 $10,922,653 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-% 3.28% 4.49% 2.41% 4.01% 5.69% 3.61% 2.97% 4.98% 4.13% 3.06% 

35 Food Services-$ $37,117,351 $6,829,346 $3,433,015 $5,078,425 $6,620,780 $2,951,261 $13,098,234 $3,922,458 $10,533,512 $16,492,843 

35 Food Services-% 4.59% 7.35% 4.67% 5.25% 5.28% 4.95% 5.01% 6.58% 5.86% 4.63% 

36 Extracurricular Activities-$ $14,672,286 $2,186,665 $2,302,317 $1,922,605 $2,707,274 $2,354,213 $8,940,158 $989,050 $5,705,912 $8,842,551 

36 Extracurricular Activities-% 1.81% 2.35% 3.13% 1.99% 2.16% 3.95% 3.42% 1.66% 3.18% 2.48% 

41 General Administration-$ $16,783,309 $2,687,158 $2,467,385 $3,027,116 $2,933,495 $2,237,037 $4,809,883 $1,450,436 $3,758,393 $7,330,749 

41 General Administration-% 2.07% 2.89% 3.36% 3.13% 2.34% 3.75% 1.84% 2.43% 2.09% 2.06% 


September 

2012 397

Function 



FY2011 Local Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Function – All Funds 






51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-$ $80,370,032 $7,143,538 $8,202,510 $10,015,057 $13,224,312 $6,371,127 $27,550,447 $5,469,044 $12,737,807 $38,444,024 

51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-% 9.93% 7.69% 11.16% 10.36% 10.54% 10.68% 10.53% 9.17% 7.09% 10.78% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-$ $9,070,352 $737,185 $366,571 $79,382 $995,737 $205,303 $1,182,843 $383,033 $2,179,198 $2,433,795 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-% 1.12% 0.79% 0.50% 0.08% 0.79% 0.34% 0.45% 0.64% 1.21% 0.68% 

53 Data Processing Services-$ $21,048,563 $628,765 $1,699,560 $1,311,899 $2,297,781 $1,145,161 $7,232,545 $1,122,693 $2,966,950 $6,117,467 

53 Data Processing Services-% 2.60% 0.68% 2.31% 1.36% 1.83% 1.92% 2.76% 1.88% 1.65% 1.72% 

92 Incremental Costs-$ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $231,537 $0 $0 $0 $0 

92 Incremental Costs-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.39% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-$ $0 $0 $5,609 $262,551 $0 $8,216 $231,082 $19,908 $15,642 $446,971 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 0.27% 0.00% 0.01% 0.09% 0.03% 0.01% 0.13% 


September 

2012 398

Austin ISD Comparison 

with Urban Peer Group Districts 


Austin ISD and the urban peer group districts including Aldine, Arlington, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, 

North East, Northside and San Antonio. 

Congress Avenue Bridge, City of Austin 


September 

2012 399

Student Group 

Table 107 


FY2011 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Student Groups 

AUSTIN ISD ALDINE ISD ARLINGTON 


DALLAS ISD 

FORT WORTH 


HOUSTON ISD 

NORTH EAST 


NORTHSIDE 


SAN ANTONIO 


All Students # 85,273 62,945 64,380 156,784 81,511 203,294 66,364 94,632 54,894 

Bilingual # of students 23,740 18,874 14,675 55,144 21,926 56,728 5,879 6,456 8,866 

Bilingual % of students 27.84% 29.98% 22.79% 35.17% 26.90% 27.90% 8.86% 6.82% 16.15% 

Bilingual Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.02 2.26 1.79 2.83 2.16 2.32 0.69 0.51 1.16 

CATE # of students 17,265 13,479 13,443 32,033 14,556 31,845 10,173 17,438 10,983 

CATE % of students 20.25% 21.41% 20.88% 20.43% 17.86% 15.66% 15.33% 18.43% 20.01% 

CATE Students to Total Staff Ratio 1.47 1.61 1.64 1.65 1.44 1.30 1.19 1.37 1.44 

Economically Disadvantaged # of students 54,550 53,139 40,599 136,501 61,642 163,905 28,869 49,675 50,944 

Economically Disadvantaged % of students 63.97% 84.42% 63.06% 87.06% 75.62% 80.62% 43.50% 52.49% 92.80% 

Economically Disadvantaged Students to Total Staff Ratio 4.65 6.36 4.97 7.01 6.09 6.71 3.37 3.89 6.68 

Gifted & Talented # of students 5,385 2,695 11,904 18,646 6,576 29,000 4,659 9,539 3,062 

Gifted & Talented % of students 6.32% 4.28% 18.49% 11.89% 8.07% 14.27% 7.02% 10.08% 5.58% 

Gifted & Talented Students to Total Staff Ratio 0.46 0.32 1.46 0.96 0.65 1.19 0.54 0.75 0.40 

LEP # of students 24,435 20,019 14,995 59,225 23,094 61,946 5,632 7,081 10,116 

LEP % of students 28.66% 31.80% 23.29% 37.77% 28.33% 30.47% 8.49% 7.48% 18.43% 

LEP Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.08 2.40 1.83 3.04 2.28 2.53 0.66 0.55 1.33 

Special Education # of students 8,164 4,325 5,160 12,083 5,910 16,019 6,320 11,074 5,642 

Special Education % of students 9.57% 6.87% 8.01% 7.71% 7.25% 7.88% 9.52% 11.70% 10.28% 

Special Education Students to Total Staff Ratio 0.70 0.52 0.63 0.62 0.58 0.66 0.74 0.87 0.74 

Total Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $9,493 $8,557 $8,273 $9,673 $9,210 $9,064 $8,421 $8,182 $9,159 

Non Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $3,638 $1,767 $1,419 $3,780 $3,948 $2,860 $2,665 $2,556 $1,577 

Total Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $13,131 $10,324 $9,692 $13,452 $13,158 $11,924 $11,086 $10,737 $10,736 


September 

2012 400

Staff 

Table 108 


FY2011 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Staffing 

AUSTIN ISD ALDINE ISD ARLINGTON ISD DALLAS ISD FORT WORTH ISD HOUSTON ISD NORTH EAST ISD NORTHSIDE ISD SAN ANTONIO ISD 

All Staff Tot FTE # 11,735.83 8,357.91 8,176.37 19,461.07 10,129.03 24,440.42 8,557.50 12,774.60 7,630.95 

Aux Tot FTE # 3,277.53 2,406.25 1,967.39 4,114.50 2,469.56 7,528.98 2,394.58 3,911.28 2,240.29 

Aux Tot FTE Pct 27.93% 28.79% 24.06% 21.14% 24.38% 30.81% 27.98% 30.62% 29.36% 

Central Admin Tot FTE # 72.47 83.50 54.00 193.53 94.00 90.00 8.00 40.00 69.00 

Central Admin Tot FTE Pct 0.62% 1.00% 0.66% 0.99% 0.93% 0.37% 0.09% 0.31% 0.90% 

Educ Aide Tot FTE # 849.95 838.50 987.97 1,742.22 834.64 1,492.32 698.45 1,026.06 898.71 

Educ Aide Tot FTE Pct 7.24% 10.03% 12.08% 8.95% 8.24% 6.11% 8.16% 8.03% 11.78% 

School Admin Tot FTE # 461.50 226.44 202.76 488.85 403.67 545.16 193.88 271.26 177.89 

School Admin Tot FTE Pct 3.93% 2.71% 2.48% 2.51% 3.99% 2.23% 2.27% 2.12% 2.33% 

Tchr Tot FTE # 6,093.62 3,963.00 4,148.29 10,665.16 5,131.82 11,811.46 4,376.69 6,116.92 3,436.77 

Tchr Tot FTE Pct 51.92% 47.42% 50.74% 54.80% 50.66% 48.33% 51.14% 47.88% 45.04% 

Support Tot FTE # 980.77 840.22 815.96 2,256.81 1,195.33 2,972.51 885.89 1,409.08 808.29 

Support Tot FTE Pct 8.36% 10.05% 9.98% 11.60% 11.80% 12.16% 10.35% 11.03% 10.59% 

Students to Teacher Ratio 13.99 15.88 15.52 14.70 15.88 17.21 15.16 15.47 15.97 

Students to Total Staff Ratio 7.27 7.53 7.87 8.06 8.05 8.32 7.76 7.41 7.19 

Teacher Total Base Salary Average $ 46,606 $ 51,561 $ 52,236 $ 55,022 $ 53,550 $ 52,417 $ 52,897 $ 52,425 $ 49,904 


September 

2012 401

Table 109 


FY2011 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code – All Funds 


AUSTIN ISD ALDINE ISD ARLINGTON ISD DALLAS ISD FORT WORTH ISD HOUSTON ISD NORTH EAST ISD NORTHSIDE ISD SAN ANTONIO ISD 

All Program Intent Code Total $ $809,496,199 $538,625,579 $532,602,587 $1,516,555,758 $750,678,522 $1,842,670,604 $558,864,450 $774,242,593 $502,757,747 

11 Basic Educational Services-$ $239,140,100 $184,921,749 $249,467,682 $663,680,349 $334,954,782 $738,936,825 $279,082,785 $381,887,628 $179,869,189 

11 Basic Educational Services-% 29.54% 34.33% 46.84% 43.76% 44.62% 40.10% 49.94% 49.32% 35.78% 

21 Gifted and Talented-$ $2,800,757 $202,243 $12,561,791 $17,119,284 $14,207,493 $9,070,456 $5,516,398 $8,566,157 $1,575,568 

21 Gifted and Talented-% 0.35% 0.04% 2.36% 1.13% 1.89% 0.49% 0.99% 1.11% 0.31% 

22 Career and Technical-$ $12,234,438 $13,798,596 $10,588,929 $31,113,360 $16,622,630 $33,489,934 $11,978,408 $15,401,935 $10,699,203 

22 Career and Technical-% 1.51% 2.56% 1.99% 2.05% 2.21% 1.82% 2.14% 1.99% 2.13% 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-$ $129,604,588 $69,775,089 $60,959,734 $137,302,331 $72,514,177 $190,395,963 $92,230,099 $125,892,566 $71,663,591 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-% 16.01% 12.95% 11.45% 9.05% 9.66% 10.33% 16.50% 16.26% 14.25% 

24 Accelerated Education-$ $85,181,181 $12,297,673 $30,347,286 $111,527,342 $101,931,588 $16,872,167 $8,881,450 $19,925,249 $33,551,651 

24 Accelerated Education-% 10.52% 2.28% 5.70% 7.35% 13.58% 0.92% 1.59% 2.57% 6.67% 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-$ $108,889,516 $67,537,941 $20,126,865 $34,622,335 $39,632,878 $161,080,529 $6,276,011 $2,738,795 $29,791,097 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-% 13.45% 12.54% 3.78% 2.28% 5.28% 8.74% 1.12% 0.35% 5.93% 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-$ $2,805,536 $0 $5,105,377 $5,708,794 $4,060,664 $462 $1,383,564 $1,263,886 $4,351,446 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-% 0.35% 0.00% 0.96% 0.38% 0.54% 0.00% 0.25% 0.16% 0.87% 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-$ $3,427,162 $3,230,125 $4,164,331 $6,514,705 $2,517,432 $14,011,904 $2,671,603 $2,559,507 $2,816,081 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-% 0.42% 0.60% 0.78% 0.43% 0.34% 0.76% 0.48% 0.33% 0.56% 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-$ $0 $906,978 $473,959 $0 $1,017,319 $925,085 $440,696 $1,775,985 $0 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-% 0.00% 0.17% 0.09% 0.00% 0.14% 0.05% 0.08% 0.23% 0.00% 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-$ $26,999,875 $53,116,867 $5,045,085 $126,862,446 $1,130 $224,758,140 $23,343,498 $23,809,771 $48,066,148 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-% 3.34% 9.86% 0.95% 8.37% 0.00% 12.20% 4.18% 3.08% 9.56% 

31 High School Allotment Program-$ $4,081,554 $3,794,701 $4,976,193 $9,404,846 $4,816,589 $0 $5,042,358 $6,430,524 $3,284,533 

32 High School Allotment Program-% 0.50% 0.70% 0.93% 0.62% 0.64% 0.00% 0.90% 0.83% 0.65% 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-$ $11,477,819 $2,013,291 $6,905,311 $11,457,400 $8,250,085 $11,108,069 $6,676,260 $11,721,433 $5,160,078 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-% 1.42% 0.37% 1.30% 0.76% 1.10% 0.60% 1.19% 1.51% 1.03% 

99 Undistributed-$ $182,853,673 $127,030,326 $121,880,044 $361,242,566 $150,151,755 $442,021,070 $115,341,320 $172,269,157 $111,929,162 

99 Undistributed-% 22.59% 23.58% 22.88% 23.82% 20.00% 23.99% 20.64% 22.25% 22.26% 


Function 

Table 110 


FY2011 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Function – All Funds 

AUSTIN ISD ALDINE ISD ARLINGTON ISD DALLAS ISD FORT WORTH 



NORTH EAST 


NORTHSIDE ISD 

SAN ANTONIO 


All Function Total $ $809,496,199 $538,625,579 $532,602,587 $1,516,555,758 $750,678,522 $1,842,670,604 $558,864,450 $774,242,593 $502,757,747 

11 Instruction-$ $458,494,939 $330,778,839 $335,592,681 $878,194,985 $425,658,374 $1,099,829,918 $336,824,146 $471,238,856 $285,127,365 

11 Instruction-% 56.64% 61.41% 63.01% 57.91% 56.70% 59.69% 60.27% 60.86% 56.71% 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-$ $13,127,763 $7,237,303 $6,621,287 $23,921,854 $11,219,242 $15,408,902 $9,192,640 $12,468,812 $7,935,046 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-% 1.62% 1.34% 1.24% 1.58% 1.49% 0.84% 1.64% 1.61% 1.58% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-$ $28,861,167 $4,924,183 $10,075,629 $44,762,446 $32,790,843 $59,152,446 $17,023,216 $19,243,759 $18,589,608 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-% 3.57% 0.91% 1.89% 2.95% 4.37% 3.21% 3.05% 2.49% 3.70% 

21 Instructional Leadership-$ $14,654,439 $7,832,324 $7,086,081 $28,489,950 $12,924,852 $24,589,652 $6,928,461 $16,586,979 $10,712,331 

21 Instructional Leadership-% 1.81% 1.45% 1.33% 1.88% 1.72% 1.33% 1.24% 2.14% 2.13% 

23 School Leandership-$ $50,207,567 $29,135,474 $25,630,088 $80,601,646 $44,209,366 $128,474,634 $30,842,095 $40,512,736 $28,989,586 

23 School Leandership-% 6.20% 5.41% 4.81% 5.31% 5.89% 6.97% 5.52% 5.23% 5.77% 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-$ $26,167,517 $21,629,819 $21,652,261 $62,452,012 $33,622,529 $57,677,988 $18,996,739 $27,620,188 $17,720,698 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-% 3.23% 4.02% 4.07% 4.12% 4.48% 3.13% 3.40% 3.57% 3.52% 

32 Social Work Services-$ $5,759,903 $1,753,744 $2,245,520 $2,833,522 $4,330,192 $2,192,063 $4,202,493 $2,650,836 $3,809,229 

32 Social Work Services-% 0.71% 0.33% 0.42% 0.19% 0.58% 0.12% 0.75% 0.34% 0.76% 

33 Health Services-$ $6,576,528 $4,980,879 $4,956,327 $17,716,700 $7,476,070 $21,412,801 $7,431,655 $7,109,024 $7,321,870 

33 Health Services-% 0.81% 0.92% 0.93% 1.17% 1.00% 1.16% 1.33% 0.92% 1.46% 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-$ $26,584,483 $28,990,253 $10,601,233 $24,352,368 $19,124,542 $46,148,429 $17,331,546 $27,235,393 $9,757,486 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-% 3.28% 5.38% 1.99% 1.61% 2.55% 2.50% 3.10% 3.52% 1.94% 

35 Food Services-$ $37,117,351 $33,834,186 $26,156,902 $79,338,344 $36,427,507 $109,172,263 $26,963,424 $40,775,710 $32,509,338 

35 Food Services-% 4.59% 6.28% 4.91% 5.23% 4.85% 5.92% 4.82% 5.27% 6.47% 

36 Extracurricular Activities-$ $14,672,286 $5,625,202 $9,048,149 $18,257,388 $9,474,777 $20,292,193 $9,292,768 $18,115,749 $9,422,087 

36 Extracurricular Activities-% 1.81% 1.04% 1.70% 1.20% 1.26% 1.10% 1.66% 2.34% 1.87% 

41 General Administration-$ $16,783,309 $10,109,636 $6,654,256 $52,618,787 $15,993,998 $34,653,585 $10,672,410 $11,009,717 $12,257,687 

41 General Administration-% 2.07% 1.88% 1.25% 3.47% 2.13% 1.88% 1.91% 1.42% 2.44% 


Function 



FY2011 Urban Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Function – All Funds 

AUSTIN ISD ALDINE ISD ARLINGTON ISD DALLAS ISD FORT WORTH 



NORTH EAST 


NORTHSIDE ISD 

SAN ANTONIO 


51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-$ $80,370,032 $40,066,284 $53,497,500 $150,003,031 $76,552,385 $177,521,530 $52,562,616 $63,305,857 $45,943,516 

51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-% 9.93% 7.44% 10.04% 9.89% 10.20% 9.63% 9.41% 8.18% 9.14% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-$ $9,070,352 $3,657,489 $4,645,002 $20,873,749 $10,879,876 $19,963,797 $4,627,130 $6,067,173 $5,482,526 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-% 1.12% 0.68% 0.87% 1.38% 1.45% 1.08% 0.83% 0.78% 1.09% 

53 Data Processing Services-$ $21,048,563 $8,069,964 $7,789,046 $31,429,782 $9,798,719 $26,180,403 $5,796,778 $10,092,867 $7,151,253 

53 Data Processing Services-% 2.60% 1.50% 1.46% 2.07% 1.31% 1.42% 1.04% 1.30% 1.42% 

92 Incremental Costs-$ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

92 Incremental Costs-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-$ $0 $0 $350,625 $709,194 $195,250 $0 $176,333 $208,937 $28,121 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 0.05% 0.03% 0.00% 0.03% 0.03% 0.01% 


September 

2012 404

Austin ISD Comparison with State of Texas 


Austin ISD and the State as a whole. 

State of Texas School District Regions 


September 

2012 405

Table 111 


Benchmark Data Comparison to State 

FY2010 Data as Reported on the 2010-11 TEA AEIS Report 

Austin ISD State Austin ISD State 

Total Students 85,273 4,912,385 

Total Staff 11,735.8 663,146.4 100.00% 100.00% 

Professional 

Teachers 6,093.6 334,876.4 51.92% 50.50% 

Professional Support 980.8 59,958.9 8.36% 9.04% 

Campus Administration 461.5 18,757.3 3.93% 2.83% 

Central Administration 72.5 6,820.1 0.62% 1.03% 

Total Professional 7,608.4 420,412.7 64.83% 63.40% 

Educational Aides 849.9 62,981.3 7.24% 9.50% 

Auxiliary 3,277.5 179,752.4 27.93% 27.11% 

Ratios 

Student to Teacher 13.99 14.67 

Student to Total Staff 7.27 7.41 

Teacher to Campus Administration 13.20 17.85 

Teacher to Central Administration 84.05 49.10 

Teacher to Professional Support 6.21 5.59 

Teachers to Aides 7.17 5.32 

Teacher to Total Staff 0.52 0.50 

All Funds Expenditure (by function) 

Actual Expenditure Information (FY11) 

Per Student 

Total Operating Expenditures 

Instruction (11,95) $ 5,430.00 $ 5,142.00 $ 457,482,789 $ 24,805,113,325 

Instructional-Related Services (12,13) $ 503.00 $ 315.00 $ 42,360,904 $ 1,520,261,151 

Instructional Leadership (21) $ 198.00 $ 131.00 $ 16,673,114 $ 633,472,153 

School Leadership (23) $ 587.00 $ 487.00 $ 49,438,207 $ 2,350,497,427 

Support Services-Student (31,32,33) $ 455.00 $ 421.00 $ 38,361,214 $ 2,031,024,489 

Student Transportation (34) $ 307.00 $ 240.00 $ 25,838,894 $ 1,156,289,200 

Food Services (35) $ 425.00 $ 461.00 $ 35,769,570 $ 2,223,522,112 

Cocurricular Activities (36) $ 174.00 $ 231.00 $ 14,623,673 $ 1,115,331,069 

Central Administration (41,92) $ 206.00 $ 269.00 $ 17,352,912 $ 1,299,666,358 

Plant Maintenance and Operations (51) $ 982.00 $ 913.00 $ 82,730,588 $ 4,405,080,294 

Security and Monitoring Services (52) $ 114.00 $ 68.00 $ 9,577,365 $ 327,376,988 

Data Processing Services (53) $ 234.00 $ 123.00 $ 19,686,249 $ 593,331,074 

Total Operating Expenditures $ 9,614.00 $ 8,802.00 809,895,479 42,460,965,640 

Instructional Expenditure Ratio (11,12,13,31) 63.70% 65.30% 

Source: 2010-11 TEA Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) Report 


September 

2012 406

Table 112 


Austin ISD Comparison to State Staffing for FY2011 

Austin ISD Staffing 

Professional 

Support 

8.36% 


27.93% 

Teachers 

51.92% 


7.24% 

Other 

4.56% 

Central 


0.62% 

Campus 


3.94% 

Teachers Professional Support Auxiliary Staff 

Educational Aides Central Administration Campus Administration 

State Staffing 

Professional 

Support 

9.04% 


27.11% 

Teachers 

50.50% 


9.50% 

Other 

3.86% 

Central 


1.03% 

Campus 


2.83% 

Teachers Professional Support Auxiliary Staff 

Educational Aides Central Administration Campus Administration 


September 

2012 407

Table 113 


Student Ratio Comparison for FY2011 

16.00 

13.99 

14.67 

12.00 

8.00 

7.26 7.41 

4.00 

- 


Student to Teacher 

State 

Student to Total Staff 

Table 114 


Teacher Ratio Comparison for FY2011 

90.00 

84.06 

80.00 

70.00 

60.00 

50.00 

40.00 

30.00 

20.00 

10.00 

- 

49.10 

Teacher to Central 


17.85 

13.20 

Teacher to 

Campus 


6.21 

5.59 

Teacher to 

Professional 

Support Staff 


State 


September 

2012 408

Table 115 


FY2011 Total Operating Expenditures per Student 

All Funds - Austin ISD 

School Leadership 

6.20% 

Support Services - 

Students 4.76% 

Instruction 61.83% 

Student 

Tranportation 

3.28% 

Other 9.42% 

Food Services 

4.43% 


and Operations 

9.93% 

Instructional 

Leadership 2.22% 

Cocurricular 

Activities 1.89% 

Central 


2.21% 

Security and Monitoring 




Table 116 


FY2011 Total Operating Expenditures per Student 

All Funds - State of Texas 

Support Services - 

Students 5.62% 

School Leadership 

1.42% 

Student 

Tranportation 4.77% 

Food Services 2.85% 


and Operations 

5.45% 

Instructional 

Leadership 2.78% 

Cocurricular 

Activities 2.87% 

Instruction 61.87% 

Other 18.03% 

Central 


10.15% 

Security and Monitoring 





September 

2012 409

Table 117 


Instruction Percentage Comparison for FY2011 

All Funds: Austin ISD comparison to the State of Texas 

70.00% 

60.00% 

61.83% 

61.82% 

50.00% 

44.79% 

47.01% 

40.00% 

30.00% 


State 

20.00% 

10.00% 

0.00% 

Instruction as % of Operating & 

Non-Operating Expenditures 

Instruction as % of Operating 

Expenditures 

In the above presentation, instruction expenditures include the following functional expenditures: 

11- Instruction 

12- Instructional Resources and Media Services 

13- Curriculum Development and Instructional Staff Development 

31- Guidance, Counseling and Evaluation Services 

32- Social Work Services 

33- Health Services 


September 

2012 410

Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST) 

The Financial Allocation Study of Texas (FAST) measures how spending in every Texas public school 

district and campus translates to student academic progress. Updated data for the third year of FAST 

ratings was released in September 2012. The Comptroller’s FAST study also identifies and shares costeffective 

practices that could benefit campuses and districts across the state. 

The Comptroller’s research team evaluated academic performance and financial data to identify school 

districts and campuses that produce high academic achievement while maintaining cost-effective 

operations. The research team evaluated financial data for each district and campus by comparing them 

to “fiscal peers” – districts and campuses that operate in similar cost environments, are of similar size and 

serve similar students. Fiscal Peers are defined as a cost comparison group consisting of up to 40 

districts (or campuses) most fiscally similar to each district (or campus). Cost factors to determine fiscal 

peers include size, location, cost-adjusted wages and student characteristics. Each district (or campus) 

can have a unique fiscal peer group, though due to similarities, many groups overlap. 


September 

2012 411

Table 118 


2012 FAST District Ratings with Fiscal Peers 

2010-11 TEA 

Accountability 

Rating 

Math 

progress 

percentile 

3-year avg 

Reading 

progress 

percentile 

3-year avg 

Composite 

Progress 

Percentile 

3-year avg + 

Spending 

Index = *Fast Rating 

Peer Districts Type of Peer County Enrollment 

Austin ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Travis 85,273 AA* 72 68 73 + Very High = 2.5 

Aldine ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Harris 62,945 AA* 86 54 75 + Low = 4.0 

Alief ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Harris 45,657 Recognized 79 96 95 + Low = 4.5 

Arlington ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Tarrant 64,380 AA* 31 42 36 + Average = 2.5 

Brownsville ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Cameron 49,800 AA* 82 73 81 + High = 3.5 

Conroe ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Montgomery 50,849 Recognized 81 78 84 + Very Low = 5.0 

Cypress-Fairbanks ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Harris 105,860 Recognized 77 86 87 + Very Low = 5.0 

Dallas ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Dallas 156,784 AA* 48 31 39 + High = 2.0 

El Paso ISD FAST Fiscal Peer El Paso 64,023 Recognized 86 63 78 + Very High = 2.5 

Fort Bend ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Fort Bend 68,710 AA* 85 85 90 + Very Low = 5.0 

Fort Worth ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Tarrant 81,511 AA* 39 29 34 + High = 2.0 

Garland ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Dallas 57,614 AA* 60 84 77 + Very Low = 4.5 

Houston ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Harris 203,294 AA* 83 65 77 + High = 3.0 

Katy ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Harris 60,573 Recognized 85 81 89 + Low = 4.5 

Klein ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Harris 45,092 Recognized 71 74 75 + Very Low = 4.5 

Lewisville ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Denton 51,298 Recognized 90 93 95 + Average = 4.0 

North East ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Bexar 66,364 Recognized 70 82 81 + High = 3.5 

Northside ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Bexar 94,632 Recognized 71 91 88 + Average = 4.0 

Pasadena ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Harris 52,010 Recognized 56 53 57 + Low = 3.5 

Plano ISD FAST Fiscal Peer Collin 55,294 Recognized 84 93 93 + Low = 4.5 

Round Rock ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Local Peer Williamson 44,590 AA* 86 85 90 + Low = 4.5 

San Antonio ISD FAST Fiscal Peer & Urban Peer Bexar 54,894 AA* 16 45 27 + High = 2.0 

Ysleta ISD FAST Fiscal Peer El Paso 44,468 Recognized 76 84 86 + Very High = 3.0 

AA* Academically Acceptable 

Data Source: http://www.fastexas.org/results/downloads.php 

Fast Components 


September 

2012 412

Student Group 

Table 119 


FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Student Groups 

(1-7 Fiscal Peers – Does not Include FAST Fiscal Peers that are also Urban or Local Peers) 

Austin ISD Alief ISD Brownsville 


Conroe ISD 

Cypress- 

Fairbanks 


El Paso ISD 

Fort Bend 


Garland ISD 

All Students 85,273 45,657 49,800 50,849 105,860 64,023 68,710 57,614 

Bilingual # 23,740 16,132 15,681 5,646 16,492 14,377 8,543 11,868 

Bilingual % of students 27.8% 35.3% 31.5% 11.1% 15.6% 22.5% 12.4% 20.6% 

Bilingual Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.02 2.63 2.03 0.91 1.30 1.67 1.01 1.62 

CATE # 17,265 7,158 13,692 9,317 26,556 21,162 11,566 13,659 

CATE % of students of students 20.2% 15.7% 27.5% 18.3% 25.1% 33.1% 16.8% 23.7% 

CATE Students to Total Staff Ratio 1.47 1.17 1.78 1.51 2.09 2.46 1.37 1.86 

Economically Disadvantage # 54,550 35,956 47,499 18,710 49,261 44,863 24,577 33,992 

Economically Disadvantage % of students 64.0% 78.8% 95.4% 36.8% 46.5% 70.1% 35.8% 59.0% 

Eco. Disadvtg. Students to Total Staff Ratio 4.65 5.86 6.16 3.02 3.87 5.22 2.91 4.63 

Gifted & Talented # 5,385 1,755 4,188 3,550 4,434 6,477 5,083 4,002 

Gifted & Talented % of students 6.3% 3.8% 8.4% 7.0% 4.2% 10.1% 7.4% 6.9% 

Gifted & Talented Stdnts to Total Staff Ratio 0.46 0.29 0.54 0.57 0.35 0.75 0.60 0.54 

LEP # 24,435 16,455 16,568 6,185 17,442 17,355 9,275 12,595 

LEP % of students 28.7% 36.0% 33.3% 12.2% 16.5% 27.1% 13.5% 21.9% 

LEP Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.08 2.68 2.15 1.00 1.37 2.02 1.10 1.71 

Special Ed # 8,164 3,419 5,293 3,789 7,644 5,390 4,112 5,293 

Special Ed % of students 9.6% 7.5% 10.6% 7.5% 7.2% 8.4% 6.00% 9.2% 

Special Ed. to Total Staff Ratio 0.70 0.56 0.69 0.61 0.60 0.63 0.49 0.72 

Total Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $9,493 $9,019 $9,497 $7,349 $7,252 $8,313 $7,694 $7,934 

Non Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $3,638 $999 $1,466 $3,239 $2,506 $1,202 $2,115 $1,183 

Total Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $13,131 $10,018 $10,964 $10,588 $9,758 $9,515 $9,809 $9,117 


September 

2012 413

Student Group 



FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Student Groups 


Austin ISD Katy ISD Klein ISD Lewisville 


Pasadena 


Plano ISD 

Ysleta ISD 

All Students 85,273 60,573 45,092 51,298 52,010 55,294 44,468 

Bilingual # 23,740 8,032 5,562 6,199 13,008 6,466 11,549 

Bilingual % of students 27.8% 13.3% 12.3% 12.10% 25.0% 11.7% 26.0% 

Bilingual Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.02 1.05 0.96 0.95 1.81 0.94 1.80 

CATE # 17,265 9,157 10,210 6,216 9,181 7,663 11,872 

CATE % of students of students 20.2% 15.10% 22.6% 12.1% 17.7% 13.9% 26.7% 

CATE Students to Total Staff Ratio 1.47 1.20 1.77 0.95 1.28 1.11 1.85 

Economically Disadvantage # 54,550 18,292 17,779 13,705 8,733 13,601 36,316 

Economically Disadvantage % of students 64.0% 30.2% 39.4% 26.7% 16.8% 24.6% 81.7% 

Eco. Disadvtg. Students to Total Staff Ratio 4.65 2.39 3.07 2.11 1.22 1.97 5.65 

Gifted & Talented # 5,385 3,780 2,893 4,695 2,641 8,151 3,593 

Gifted & Talented % of students 6.3% 6.2% 6.4% 9.2% 5.1% 14.70% 8.1% 

Gifted & Talented Stdnts to Total Staff Ratio 0.46 0.49 0.50 0.72 0.37 1.18 0.56 

LEP # 24,435 8,301 5,852 6,570 14,711 6,684 10,585 

LEP % of students 28.7% 13.7% 13.0% 12.8% 28.3% 12.1% 23.8% 

LEP Students to Total Staff Ratio 2.08 1.08 1.01 1.01 2.05 0.97 1.65 

Special Ed # 8,164 4,647 3,406 4,936 3,997 5,696 4,490 

Special Ed % of students 9.6% 7.7% 7.6% 9.6% 7.7% 10.3% 10.1% 

Special Ed. to Total Staff Ratio 0.70 0.61 0.59 0.76 0.56 0.83 0.70 

Total Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $9,493 $8,012 $7,837 $8,495 $8,638 $8,392 $9,310 

Non Operating Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $3,638 $3,195 $3,099 $3,369 $938 $4,773 $1,779 

Total Expenditures Per Student (General Fund) $13,131 $11,207 $10,936 $11,864 $9,576 $13,165 $11,089 


September 

2012 414

Staff 

Table 120 


FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Staffing 





Cypress- 

Fairbanks 



Fort Bend 



All Staff Tot FTE # 11,736.00 6,138.00 7,713.00 6,186.00 12,734.00 8,592.00 8,450.00 7,346.00 

Aux Tot FTE # 3,278.00 1,757.00 2,536.00 1,768.00 4,687.00 2,326.00 2,551.00 2,182.00 

Aux Tot FTE % 27.9% 28.6% 32.9% 28.6% 36.8% 27.1% 30.2% 29.7% 

Support Tot FTE # 981.00 611.00 665.00 595.00 1,048.00 1,175.00 1,007.00 766.00 

Support Tot FTE % 8.4% 10.0% 8.6% 9.6% 8.2% 13.7% 11.9% 10.4% 

Central Admin Tot FTE # 72.00 58.00 9.00 32.00 69.00 22.00 31.00 60.00 

Central Admin Tot FTE % 0.6% 0.9% 0.1% 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 0.4% 0.8% 

Tchr Tot FTE # 6,094.00 3,037.00 3,425.00 3,191.00 6,470.00 4,399.00 4,135.00 3,712.00 

Tchr Tot FTE % 51.9% 49.5% 44.4% 51.6% 50.8% 51.2% 48.9% 50.5% 

Educ Aide Tot FTE # 850.00 517.00 875.00 434.00 26.00 446.00 534.00 432.00 

Educ Aide Tot FTE % 7.2% 8.4% 11.3% 7.0% 0.2% 5.2% 6.3% 5.9% 

School Admin Tot FTE # 462.00 157.00 203.00 166.00 434.00 224.00 193.00 194.00 

School Admin Tot FTE % 3.9% 2.6% 2.6% 2.7% 3.4% 2.6% 2.3% 2.6% 

Students to Teacher Ratio 13.99 15.03 14.54 15.94 16.36 14.55 16.62 15.52 

Students to Total Staff Ratio 7.27 7.44 6.46 8.22 8.31 7.45 8.13 7.84 

Teacher Total Base Salary Average $ $46,606 $53,043 $49,629 $49,997 $50,239 $49,211 $52,651 $50,680 


September 

2012 415

Staff 



FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Staffing 




Pasadena 




All Staff Tot FTE # 11,736.00 7,656.00 5,783.00 6,509.00 7,177.00 6,892.00 6,429.00 

Aux Tot FTE # 3,278.00 2,392.00 1,822.00 1,366.00 2,106.00 1,332.00 2,097.00 

Aux Tot FTE % 27.9% 31.2% 31.5% 21.0% 29.4% 19.3% 32.6% 

Support Tot FTE # 981.00 506.00 393.00 599.00 585.00 667.00 510.00 

Support Tot FTE % 8.4% 6.6% 6.8% 9.2% 8.2% 9.7% 7.9% 

Central Admin Tot FTE # 72.00 52.00 39.00 56.00 76.00 76.00 22.00 

Central Admin Tot FTE % 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% 0.9% 1.1% 1.1% 0.3% 

Tchr Tot FTE # 6,094.00 3,869.00 2,995.00 3,765.00 3,500.00 4,011.00 3,054.00 

Tchr Tot FTE % 51.9% 50.5% 51.8% 57.8% 48.8% 58.2% 47.5% 

Educ Aide Tot FTE # 850.00 683.00 376.00 542.00 734.00 631.00 593.00 

Educ Aide Tot FTE % 7.2% 8.9% 6.5% 8.3% 10.2% 9.2% 9.2% 

School Admin Tot FTE # 462.00 155.00 158.00 182.00 175.00 175.00 154.00 

School Admin Tot FTE % 3.9% 2.0% 2.7% 2.8% 2.4% 2.5% 2.4% 

Students to Teacher Ratio 13.99 15.66 15.06 13.62 14.86 13.79 14.56 

Students to Total Staff Ratio 7.27 7.91 7.80 7.88 7.25 8.02 6.92 

Teacher Total Base Salary Average $ $46,606 $50,799 $51,967 $49,744 $49,694 $51,741 $50,144 


September 

2012 416

Table 121 


FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code – All Funds 






Cypress- 

Fairbanks 



Fort Bend 



All Program Intent Code Total $ 809,496,199 411,780,715 472,974,975 373,711,660 767,677,091 532,228,528 528,686,518 457,084,513 

11 Basic Educational Services-$ 239,140,100 188,487,404 201,308,210 179,473,728 382,105,130 246,794,636 275,501,847 191,827,480 

11 Basic Educational Services-% 29.5% 45.8% 42.6% 48.0% 49.8% 46.4% 52.1% 42.0% 

21 Gifted and Talented-$ 2,800,757 1,573,526 1,116,685 1,327,775 5,799,048 7,415,380 12,092,018 5,769,564 

21 Gifted and Talented-% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.7% 0.9% 1.5% 0.7% 

22 Career and Technical-$ 12,234,438 5,677,195 14,707,866 8,538,003 13,404,447 14,426,489 13,137,574 15,765,467 

22 Career and Technical-% 1.5% 1.4% 3.1% 2.3% 1.7% 2.7% 2.5% 3.4% 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-$ 129,604,588 48,472,715 56,106,434 44,720,972 82,693,733 58,469,724 61,215,738 55,736,103 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-% 16.0% 11.8% 11.9% 12.0% 10.8% 11.0% 11.6% 12.2% 

24 Accelerated Education-$ 85,181,181 17,591,765 46,199,961 11,331,278 36,067,264 56,896,212 8,574,095 29,900,432 

24 Accelerated Education-% 10.5% 4.3% 9.8% 3.0% 4.7% 10.7% 1.6% 6.5% 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-$ 108,889,516 10,514,527 5,804,156 2,602,112 45,884,692 6,664,278 7,660,709 39,363,910 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-% 13.45% 2.55% 1.23% 0.70% 5.98% 1.25% 1.45% 8.61% 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-$ 2,805,536 2,119,917 2,647,195 1,482,160 - 2,899,988 1,407,103 1,760,682 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-% 0.35% 0.51% 0.56% 0.40% 0.00% 0.54% 0.27% 0.39% 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-$ 3,427,162 5,415,279 4,035,751 870,337 1,215,026 4,138,324 2,058,911 2,248,573 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-% 0.42% 1.32% 0.85% 0.23% 0.16% 0.78% 0.39% 0.49% 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-$ - 14,765 - - 1,660,166 828,729 490,651 114 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.22% 0.16% 0.09% 0.00% 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-$ 26,999,875 20,339,118 21,197,608 31,104,619 3,831,535 19,891,389 19,996,028 3,903,344 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-% 3.34% 4.94% 4.48% 8.32% 0.50% 3.74% 3.78% 0.85% 

31 High School Allotment Program-$ 4,081,554 3,050,969 22,361 3,477,807 - 6,094,243 5,346,036 4,300,877 

32 High School Allotment Program-% 0.50% 0.74% 0.00% 0.93% 0.00% 1.15% 1.01% 0.94% 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-$ 11,477,819 2,730,101 9,409,589 6,467,494 8,480,508 8,367,836 5,494,105 4,101,595 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-% 1.42% 0.66% 1.99% 1.73% 1.10% 1.57% 1.04% 0.90% 

99 Undistributed-$ 182,853,673 105,793,434 110,419,159 82,315,375 186,535,542 99,341,300 115,711,703 102,406,372 

100 Undistributed-% 22.59% 25.69% 23.35% 22.03% 24.30% 18.67% 21.89% 22.40% 




FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Program Intent Code – All Funds 





Pasadena 




All Program Intent Code Total $ 809,496,199 485,323,474 353,384,394 435,756,141 449,269,173 464,035,774 414,015,153 

11 Basic Educational Services-$ 239,140,100 258,781,430 192,189,890 230,475,949 188,507,615 233,573,420 177,376,942 

11 Basic Educational Services-% 29.5% 32.0% 23.7% 28.5% 23.3% 28.9% 21.9% 

21 Gifted and Talented-$ 2,800,757 9,916,786 1,034,477 4,960,170 10,864,247 6,670,479 979,556 

21 Gifted and Talented-% 0.3% 1.2% 0.1% 0.6% 1.3% 0.8% 0.1% 

22 Career and Technical-$ 12,234,438 9,397,731 11,622,476 10,357,844 9,967,504 8,699,936 10,716,740 

22 Career and Technical-% 1.5% 1.2% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.3% 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-$ 129,604,588 64,292,559 42,948,712 65,132,876 54,003,404 74,156,378 62,158,397 

23 Services to Students w/Disabilities-% 16.0% 7.9% 5.3% 8.0% 6.7% 9.2% 7.7% 

24 Accelerated Education-$ 85,181,181 5,729,024 6,304,977 11,238,857 52,694,615 14,043,010 31,871,116 

24 Accelerated Education-% 10.5% 0.7% 0.8% 1.4% 6.5% 1.7% 3.9% 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-$ 108,889,516 7,250,094 3,036,373 6,867,264 10,085,562 8,904,871 5,356,992 

25 Bilingual Ed. and Special Lang.-% 13.45% 0.90% 0.38% 0.85% 1.25% 1.10% 0.66% 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-$ 2,805,536 1,518,514 1,576,524 1,167,749 2,559,848 2,198,776 2,250,640 

26 Non-Disc. Alt. Ed-AEP Srvcs-% 0.35% 0.19% 0.19% 0.14% 0.32% 0.27% 0.28% 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-$ 3,427,162 1,766,927 1,478,830 1,756,898 5,671,864 1,999,799 2,402,973 

28 Disc. Alt. Ed.-DAEP Basic Serv-% 0.42% 0.22% 0.18% 0.22% 0.70% 0.25% 0.30% 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-$ - - 709,457 - - - 40,806 

29 Disc. Alt Ed-DAEP Supplemental-% 0.00% 0.00% 0.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-$ 26,999,875 9,465,370 7,689,586 1,744,317 - 4,692,327 21,449,922 

30 T1 A Schoolwide-ST Comp ≥ 40%-% 3.34% 1.17% 0.95% 0.22% 0.00% 0.58% 2.65% 

31 High School Allotment Program-$ 4,081,554 4,737,330 4,037,041 3,259,666 4,938,702 7,388,362 3,459,755 

32 High School Allotment Program-% 0.50% 0.59% 0.50% 0.40% 0.61% 0.91% 0.43% 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-$ 11,477,819 6,907,257 4,854,698 6,554,453 3,876,455 4,526,095 6,293,068 

91 Athletics & Related Activity-% 1.42% 0.85% 0.60% 0.81% 0.48% 0.56% 0.78% 

99 Undistributed-$ 182,853,673 105,560,452 75,901,353 92,240,098 106,099,357 97,182,321 89,658,246 

100 Undistributed-% 22.59% 13.04% 9.38% 11.39% 13.11% 12.01% 11.08% 


Function 

Table 122 


FY2011 FAST Fiscal Peer Group Comparison of Total Operating Expenditures by Function – All Funds 





Cypress- 

Fairbanks 



Fort Bend 



All Function Total $ 809,496,199 411,780,715 472,974,975 373,711,660 767,677,091 532,228,528 528,686,518 457,084,513 

11 Instruction-$ 458,494,939 254,940,517 264,469,144 229,111,988 486,957,589 313,372,232 330,919,369 279,602,202 

11 Instruction-% 56.6% 61.9% 55.9% 61.3% 63.4% 58.9% 62.6% 61.2% 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-$ 13,127,763 5,737,589 8,553,058 4,722,738 6,157,296 9,602,154 7,777,269 7,606,555 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-% 1.6% 1.4% 1.8% 1.3% 0.8% 1.8% 1.5% 1.7% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-$ 28,861,167 8,795,457 18,261,682 3,391,951 17,854,085 24,297,859 6,710,976 8,436,067 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-% 3.6% 2.1% 3.9% 0.9% 2.3% 4.6% 1.3% 1.8% 

21 Instructional Leadership-$ 14,654,439 4,480,547 7,368,009 3,208,664 11,699,446 5,366,659 5,477,426 9,391,593 

21 Instructional Leadership-% 1.8% 1.1% 1.6% 0.9% 1.5% 1.0% 1.0% 2.1% 

23 School Leandership-$ 50,207,567 23,903,681 23,655,395 22,176,993 41,323,664 34,242,036 28,918,021 27,187,636 

23 School Leandership-% 6.2% 5.8% 5.0% 5.9% 5.4% 6.4% 5.5% 5.9% 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-$ 26,167,517 15,782,923 17,244,116 14,347,375 23,879,105 22,172,607 20,009,449 18,151,855 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-% 3.2% 3.8% 3.6% 3.8% 3.1% 4.2% 3.8% 4.0% 

32 Social Work Services-$ 5,759,903 683,751 729,246 412,879 977,504 3,936,442 840,256 916,222 

32 Social Work Services-% 0.7% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.7% 0.2% 0.2% 

33 Health Services-$ 6,576,528 3,908,983 5,435,032 3,907,678 8,479,310 6,460,550 6,777,310 5,481,906 

33 Health Services-% 0.8% 0.9% 1.1% 1.0% 1.1% 1.2% 1.3% 1.2% 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-$ 26,584,483 12,901,693 12,853,368 18,236,846 29,747,000 11,825,733 15,844,009 8,958,598 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-% 3.3% 3.1% 2.7% 4.9% 3.9% 2.2% 3.0% 2.0% 

35 Food Services-$ 37,117,351 23,210,351 28,342,742 15,452,477 42,289,872 23,262,025 21,138,423 25,547,341 

35 Food Services-% 4.6% 5.6% 6.0% 4.1% 5.5% 4.4% 4.0% 5.6% 

36 Extracurricular Activities-$ 14,672,286 5,653,189 15,660,167 8,965,218 14,014,202 10,847,917 9,641,405 6,164,195 

36 Extracurricular Activities-% 1.8% 1.4% 3.3% 2.4% 1.8% 2.0% 1.8% 1.3% 

41 General Administration-$ 16,783,309 6,752,555 11,984,796 5,835,193 10,834,221 10,190,401 11,645,204 10,138,055 

41 General Administration-% 2.1% 1.6% 2.5% 1.6% 1.4% 1.9% 2.2% 2.2% 


September 

2012 419

Function 








Cypress- 

Fairbanks 



Fort Bend 



51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-$ 80,370,032 36,994,107 48,773,651 35,953,211 64,786,609 47,882,618 47,860,657 35,620,537 

51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-% 9.9% 9.0% 10.3% 9.6% 8.4% 9.0% 9.1% 7.8% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-$ 9,070,352 5,057,816 5,962,976 3,933,371 4,834,051 5,166,241 5,211,484 3,506,919 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-% 1.1% 1.2% 1.3% 1.1% 0.6% 1.0% 1.0% 0.8% 

53 Data Processing Services-$ 21,048,563 2,645,471 3,472,127 4,055,078 3,801,557 3,603,054 9,915,260 10,308,598 

53 Data Processing Services-% 2.6% 0.6% 0.7% 1.1% 0.5% 0.7% 1.9% 1.9% 

92 Incremental Costs-$ - - - - - - - 0.0% 

92 Incremental Costs-% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-$ - 332,085 209,466 - 41,580 - - 66,234 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 


September 

2012 420

Function 







Pasadena 




All Function Total $ 809,496,199 485,323,474 353,384,394 435,756,141 449,269,173 464,035,774 414,015,153 

11 Instruction-$ 458,494,939 299,169,407 214,248,971 271,220,883 266,305,299 297,638,714 248,773,867 

11 Instruction-% 56.6% 61.6% 60.6% 62.2% 59.3% 64.1% 60.1% 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-$ 13,127,763 6,939,685 4,433,666 6,016,377 6,005,679 8,361,949 5,124,316 

12 Instruct. Resources & Media Srvcs-% 1.6% 1.4% 1.3% 1.4% 1.3% 1.8% 1.2% 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-$ 28,861,167 8,323,895 8,634,878 6,484,516 7,272,672 9,393,015 11,528,136 

13 Curriculum & Staff Development-% 3.6% 1.7% 2.4% 1.5% 1.6% 2.0% 2.8% 

21 Instructional Leadership-$ 14,654,439 3,973,624 3,199,081 7,832,922 5,962,748 3,973,959 5,897,515 

21 Instructional Leadership-% 1.8% 0.8% 0.9% 1.8% 1.3% 0.9% 1.4% 

23 School Leandership-$ 50,207,567 27,969,427 21,314,501 25,578,719 30,782,750 23,260,875 23,508,594 

23 School Leandership-% 6.2% 5.8% 6.0% 5.9% 6.9% 5.0% 5.7% 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-$ 26,167,517 19,243,237 15,976,598 18,967,194 18,562,656 17,980,882 14,077,272 

31 Guidance, Counseling, Eval. Srvcs.-% 3.2% 4.0% 4.5% 4.4% 4.1% 3.9% 3.4% 

32 Social Work Services-$ 5,759,903 - 308,221 100,498 222,538 1,081,944 2,929,736 

32 Social Work Services-% 0.7% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.7% 

33 Health Services-$ 6,576,528 4,648,318 3,692,914 4,530,006 4,378,411 5,018,660 4,596,616 

33 Health Services-% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.1% 1.1% 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-$ 26,584,483 13,595,685 9,224,480 9,394,594 11,752,604 9,780,856 7,503,763 

34 Student (Pupil) Transportation-% 3.3% 2.8% 2.6% 2.2% 2.6% 2.1% 1.8% 

35 Food Services-$ 37,117,351 22,740,358 19,032,955 19,125,507 27,837,308 20,662,364 20,686,367 

35 Food Services-% 4.6% 4.7% 5.4% 4.4% 6.2% 4.5% 5.0% 

36 Extracurricular Activities-$ 14,672,286 9,930,131 6,643,710 10,198,787 6,380,798 7,412,473 10,783,159 

36 Extracurricular Activities-% 1.8% 2.0% 1.9% 2.3% 1.4% 1.6% 2.6% 

41 General Administration-$ 16,783,309 9,556,447 7,045,048 9,859,951 9,690,445 8,948,197 9,819,375 

41 General Administration-% 2.1% 2.0% 2.0% 2.3% 2.2% 1.9% 2.4% 


Function 







Pasadena 




51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-$ 80,370,032 45,947,469 29,718,368 39,728,378 44,283,997 41,480,178 39,589,366 

51 Facility Maintenance & Operations-% 9.9% 9.5% 8.4% 9.1% 9.9% 8.9% 9.6% 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-$ 9,070,352 5,054,914 4,295,052 923,346 4,609,826 2,902,846 4,271,879 

52 Security & Monitoring Services-% 1.1% 1.0% 1.2% 0.2% 1.0% 0.6% 1.0% 

53 Data Processing Services-$ 21,048,563 8,182,987 5,555,969 5,640,849 4,866,204 5,591,979 4,925,192 

53 Data Processing Services-% 2.6% 1.7% 1.6% 1.3% 1.1% 1.2% 1.2% 

92 Incremental Costs-$ - - - - - 443,936 - 

92 Incremental Costs-% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-$ - 47,890 59,982 153,614 355,238 102,947 - 

95 Payments to JJAEPS-% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 


September 

2012 422

Food Services 

The Food Service Department administers the National School Lunch Program and Breakfast Program 

for all Austin ISD schools. The mission of the department is to actively support the academic achievement 

of students by providing nutritious, appetizing meals that promote health, well-being and learning. 

Major areas of responsibilities include: approving and maintaining applications for federally subsidized 

lunch and breakfast meal benefits for income eligible students, operation and supervision of all campus 

kitchens, purchase of all food and supplies, maintenance of kitchen equipment, all financial related 

activities to include payroll for department employees, accounts payable/receivable and budgeting. On 

average, Food Services served approximately 54,000 lunches and 21,000 breakfasts in FY2012. 

60,000 

Table 123 

Austin Average Independent Daily Lunch School Participation District 

Average Daily Lunch Three Participation Year Comparison – Three Year Comparison 

50,000 

40,000 

30,000 

20,000 

10,000 

- 

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 

25,000 

Table 124 

Austin Average Independent Daily Breakfast School Participation District 

Average Daily Breakfast Three Participation Year Comparison – Three Year Comparison 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

0 

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 


September 

2012 423

Table 125 


Food Service Productivity 

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 

Number of free lunches served 6,630,431 6,961,968 7,197,365 

Number of reduce priced lunches served 798,387 701,948 554,829 

Number of full price lunches served 1,727,434 1,674,505 1,661,788 

Number of A la Carte meal equivalents 1,407,146 1,368,566 1,290,902 

Total number of lunches served 10,563,398 10,706,987 10,704,884 

Average daily free lunches served 37,888 39,783 41,128 

Average daily reduced price lunches served 4,562 4,011 3,170 

Average daily full price lunches served 9,871 9,569 9,496 

Total average daily lunches served 60,362 61,183 61,171 

Number of free breakfasts served 2,980,023 3,116,045 3,276,842 

Number of reduce priced breakfasts served 237,324 202,274 165,092 

Number of full price breakfasts served 201,648 195,167 206,236 

Number of A la Carte meal equivalents 242,153 235,514 222,149 

Total number of breakfasts served 3,661,148 3,749,000 3,870,319 

Average daily free breakfasts served 17,029 17,806 18,725 

Average daily reduced price breakfasts served 1,356 1,156 943 

Average daily full price breakfasts served 1,152 1,115 1,178 

Total average daily breakfasts served 20,921 21,423 22,116 

Number of days breakfast & lunch served 175 175 175 

Below is a representative sample of neighboring districts’ meal prices for FY2013. Breakfast prices for 

FY2013 will remain constant from the prior two years. Lunch prices for 2011-12 were increased slightly 

from $2.15 to $2.25 for elementary lunch and from $2.25 to $2.40 for secondary lunch. As shown in the 

chart below, student meal prices at AISD are comparable with a majority of the neighboring districts. 


September 

2012 424

School District 

Enrollment 

FY2012 

Table 126 


District Meal Pricing Comparison for FY2013 

FY 2011 1 

FY2013 Breakfast Price 

FY 2013 Lunch Price 


Free & Reduced Elementary Secondary 2 Elementary Secondary 2 Adult Lunch 

Austin ISD 85,273 64.0% $1.25 $1.25 $2.25 $2.40 $3.00 

Bastrop ISD 9,043 65.1% $1.00 $1.00 $1.75 $2.00/$2.25 $3.00 

Eanes ISD 7,691 2.7% no breakfast no breakfast $2.75 $3.25/$3.50 $3.50 

Hays CISD 15,262 48.9% $1.25 $1.35 $2.10 $2.30 $2.65/$3.00 3 

Lake Travis ISD 6,940 14.6% $1.50 $1.60/$1.75 $2.70 $3.00/$3.60 $3.60 

Leander ISD 32,034 22.5% $1.35 $1.60 $2.10 $2.35 $2.75/$3.25 4 

Manor ISD 7,173 79.4% $1.35 $1.35 $2.35 $2.60 $3.00 

Pflugerville ISD 22,657 51.4% $1.75 $1.75 $2.50 $2.75 $3.50 

Round Rock ISD 44,590 29.9% $1.35 $1.35 $2.20 $2.45 $3.00 

1 Data from 2011 AEIS Report. 2012 statistics not available at the time of print 

2 Indicates Middle School/High School Prices 

3 Indicates Staff/Guest Prices 

4 Indicates Elementary/Secondary Adult Prices 

Table 127 


Historical & Current District Meal Lunch & Breakfast Pricing 

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 

FY2012 

Adopted 


Adopted 

Charge per lunch to students: 

Full Price - Elementary $ 2.10 $ 2.10 $ 2.10 $ 2.15 $ 2.25 

Full Price - Secondary $ 2.25 $ 2.25 $ 2.25 $ 2.30 $ 2.40 

Reduced Priced Meal - All Levels $ 0.40 $ 0.40 $ 0.40 $ 0.40 $ 0.40 

Charge per lunch to adults $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 

Charge per breakfast to students: 

Full Price - Elementary & Secondary $ 1.25 $ 1.25 $ 1.25 $ 1.25 $ 1.25 

Reduced Priced Meal - All Levels $ 0.30 $ 0.30 $ 0.30 $ 0.30 $ 0.30 

Charge per breakfast to adults A la Carte A la Carte A la Carte A la Carte A la Carte 


September 

2012 425


The Austin ISD Transportation Department serves approximately 20,000 students each day through 239 

regular routes, 153 special education routes, 120 mid-day routes, 8,000 field trips, athletic routes and 

summer service routes for extended learning opportunities for students. 

Transportation Department was recognized for “best practices” in the implementation and optional use of 

technology to effectively and efficiently operate the pupil transportation system. The department has 

current technology applications to manage efficient routing, a stop location finder, school personnel 

access to bus route information, field trips and field trip requests, after school buses, planning fleet 

maintenance, mapping rider addresses, discipline referrals, video of bus incidents, an accident database 

and GPS system. 

Effective fleet management is another key performance area with excellent results. The average age of 

the fleet is 6.7 years, which results in reduced total costs. Replacement buses meet the latest lowemission 

EPA standards. The District owns a plug-in hybrid bus; it is in process of piloting six propane 

buses made possible through Railroad Commission funding, and has retrofitted 93 buses that are seven 

to 10 years old to improve indoor air quality and reduce emissions. All of these efforts are aligned to the 

district’s commitment to and focus on environmental stewardship. 

Table 128 


Transportation Historical Information 

FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 

Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual 

Total Avg Daily Ridership 16,726 16,842 16,957 19,708 19,723 19,915 

Mileage 

Route Related 5,416,465 5,461,537 5,595,685 5,453,876 5,716,537 5,841,439 

Extracurricular 579,474 594,262 702,045 864,553 839,453 957,718 

Total Buses 

Regular Education 281 289 298 302 306 306 

Special Education 187 192 192 198 194 194 

Buses by Age 

1 to 5 yrs 219 259 266 275 311 219 

6 to 10 yrs 212 215 71 86 96 196 

Over 10 yrs 37 7 153 139 93 97 

*Estimated 


September 

2012 426

Risk Management 

The district’s risk management program encompasses various means of protecting the district against 

losses. Various risks of loss include those related to torts, theft, damage, destruction of assets, business 

interruption, errors and omissions, injuries to employees, and disasters. 

The district participates in the Texas Association of School Boards Modified Self-Funded program for its 

general liability, professional/legal liability and vehicle liability insurance. The district partners with the 

Texas Association of School Boards for the administration of its self-funded Workers’ Compensation 

insurance. The district is self-insured up to $400,000 per occurrence for losses related to workers’ 

compensation and has purchased excess coverage through a commercial insurer licensed in the State of 

Texas. 

The district has commercial insurance for all other risks of loss. There were no significant reductions in 

coverage in the past fiscal year and there were no settlements exceeding insurance coverage for each 

the past three fiscal years. 

Austin ISD Property/Casualty Coverage 

 

Building & Contents 

Deductible per occurrence including Wind & Hail and AOP - $100,000 

Property Limit - $1,924,353,250 

Loss Limit - $750,000,000 

 

General Liability 

Deductible per Occurrence - $20,000 

Per Occurrence Limit - $1,000,000 

Employee Benefits per Occurrence Limit - $100,000 

 

School Professional Legal Liability 


Per Occurrence Limit - $1,000,000 

Annual Aggregate - $1,000,000 

Limits adjusted for Sexual Misconduct Cases 

 

Fleet Liability 


Texas Tort Limits $100,000/$300,000/$100,000 apply 


September 

2012 427

Academic Programs 

The district provides a rich and varied curriculum to approximately 87,000 students at 119 regular 

campuses and 10 special campuses. This means that our focus in every classroom is on teaching and 

learning every day. Through high standards that ensure academic rigor in a thinking curriculum, our 

students’ learning opportunities are grounded in the skills they will need for success in the 21 st Century. 

Early Childhood 

The district curriculum, for prekindergarten, is closely tied to the guidelines issued by the State of Texas 

for all students. Prekindergarten students receive instruction in all of the areas of language and literacy, 

mathematics, social studies, science, technology, health, visual arts, music, and physical education to 

prepare them for success in kindergarten. Emphasis is placed on: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Language and concept development 

Development of problem solving skills 

Promotion of interest and joy in learning 

Provision of ample opportunities for self-expression and divergent thinking 

Development of responsibility and self-control 

Promotion of feelings of security and success. 

Prekindergarten teachers are provided a state-adopted curriculum that integrates subject areas and 

concepts throughout a strong literacy development program. The curriculum requirements are aligned 

with the district curriculum initiative, pre-K through grade 12. 

The Austin Independent School District offers a free full-day kindergarten program for all children who 

turn five on or before September 1st of the current school year. Kindergarten serves as the introduction 

into the public school system for most children. Austin ISD considers kindergarten to be an integral part of 

the elementary school program. Instead of being a version of first grade, kindergarten expands the social, 

emotional, cognitive and physical skills typical of preschool classrooms, focusing on deeper, more 

rigorous academic content integrated within a developmentally appropriate framework that guides 

children in becoming more intentional, self-directed learners ready for first grade. Kindergarten is an 

exciting time for both the child and his or her parents. During this important year, the child builds a strong 

base for continuing academic success. 

Kindergarten teachers incorporate the district’s Literacy Framework, which includes a K-12 balanced 

literacy approach to the teaching of reading and writing using Reader's and Writer's Workshop. Balanced 

literacy provides structures and support systems that enable all students to acquire the knowledge, skills, 

and habits needed to meet or exceed the standards in reading, writing, listening and speaking. In science 

and mathematics, kindergarten teachers integrate inquiry and hands-on learning through the use of 

experiments, investigations, and manipulative materials and tools. Additionally, just like their first through 

sixth grade peers, all AISD kindergarteners participate in enrichment activities, rotating on a daily basis 

between art, music and physical education classes. 


September 

2012 428

Mathematics 

The Austin ISD mathematics curriculum consists of high quality instructional and assessment resources 

that are aligned to state and national standards. The AISD mathematics curriculum framework 

incorporates and utilizes the Texas College and Career Readiness Standards (CCRS), the English 

Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), and the Response to Intervention (RtI) models as provided by 

the Texas Education Agency. Mathematics in Austin ISD: 

PK: Pre-Kindergarten Mathematics 

Grades K-5: Elementary Mathematics 

Grades 6-8: Middle School Mathematics (including Algebra I) 

Grades 9-12: High School Mathematics (Algebra I, Geometry, Math Models and Applications, 

Algebra II, Pre-calculus, AP Statistics, AP Calculus AB and AP Calculus BC). 

Science 

The Austin ISD Science Department will develop and support the implementation of a rigorous curriculum 

for scientific inquiry so that all students become scientifically literate through investigating the knowledge, 

systems, patterns and processes of the natural world. 

The Austin Independent School District’s science program utilizes a systemic PK-12 Scientific Inquiry 

approach to the teaching and learning of science based on the National Science Education Standards. 

Scientific Inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose 

explanations based on the evidence derived from their work. Scientific Inquiry also refers to the activities 

of students in which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an 

understanding of how scientists study the natural world. 

The science curriculum is developed in accordance with the framework designed by McTighe, J. and 

Wiggins, G., Understanding by Design Expanded 2 nd Edition, 2005. This design utilizes a conceptual 

framework that includes essential questions, assessments and lesson plans for teachers that undergirds 

implementation of inquiry-based teaching and learning for students. 


The Austin ISD Social Studies Curriculum Department fosters in students habits of body and mind that 

enable them to become active citizens in a democratic society within an increasingly complex, diverse, 

and interdependent world. Students acquire the necessary knowledge, skills, and values to become 

lifelong learners and productive citizens. 

Students in social studies are provided with opportunities to understand that the present connects to the 

past and affects the future. Teaching for deep understanding in social studies begins with planning the big 

ideas students should learn. Essential questions guide a three-stage design process called "backward 

design" that creates a rigorous and engaging curriculum leading to improved student performance in a 

standards-based environment (McTighe, J. and Wiggins, G., Understanding by Design Expanded 2 nd 

Edition, 2005). 


September 

2012 429

Research shows that all students learn through a variety of relevant experiences. Interactions that 

activate and build on prior knowledge and promote higher level thinking skills are essential for all 

students, especially those who are English Language Learners, (Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D., 

Making Content Comprehensible for English Language Learners—The SIOP Model, 2000). Active 

learning is essential for mastery of social studies concepts. 

Response to Intervention 

The Austin ISD Response to Intervention (RtI) framework is designed to support all students with college 

readiness rigor at each grade level inclusive of clear expectations for teaching and learning. Instructional 

supports will be provided to meet the needs of all students evidenced by fidelity of implementation and 

data from progress monitoring. The RtI framework aligns a process in which each student receives 

instruction to address his/her unique learning needs. Instruction is composed of evidenced based 

teaching techniques, materials, and strategies provided within the core curriculum. To meet the needs of 

all students, instructional practices within the core general education curriculum setting will include 

differentiation, resources matching student need, supplemental and intensive instruction, and changing 

pace but not rigor. Inherent in this process is the understanding that students respond differently to 

instruction, and data collected regarding student performance must guide instruction. Universal screeners 

and progress monitoring tools are integral to a successful RtI framework. High quality professional 

development to learn research-based approaches is key to the implementation of an efficacious RtI 

framework. RtI process requires a commitment to ongoing, job-embedded professional development for 

example, in data collection and analysis, and differentiated instruction (Ehren, Ehren, Proly, 2009). 

Special Education 

Austin ISD is committed to inclusive practices for students with disabilities and understands the provision 

of services for students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment is not only a legal mandate, 

but is also a practice that has a sound pedagogical basis. The use of research-based instructional 

strategies and collaborative practices to support students in the general education curriculum is an 

integral component of inclusion. Decisions regarding the services for students with disabilities are 

individually determined, and the extent to which students receive services in general education settings 

and/or other specialized settings are determined collaboratively. 

Reading Improvement, Dyslexia, and 504 Service 

The Austin ISD Department of Reading Improvement, Dyslexia and Section 504 Services will monitor 

each campus compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Amendment Act 2008, Section 504, for 

students in Elementary and Secondary Schools (federal law), and the Texas Dyslexia Procedures 2007 

(state law), and that each campus provides a summer program for struggling readers in middle and high 

School. The Three Tier intervention research model is a component of both the Section 504 process and 

the State Dyslexia Guidelines. 


September 

2012 430

Gifted and Talented 

The Gifted/Talented program seeks to provide an appropriate match between a child’s ability, interest and 

motivation and the educational opportunities that can nurture these qualities to the highest degree. AISD 

is committed to meeting the needs of all the children in its schools, including those of high academic 

and/or intellectual ability whose needs may not be met by the general curriculum. Differentiated 

instruction is an identified best practice and required for K-12 students participating in GT programs in the 

state. Students in the AISD gifted/talented program are provided with assignments that match their level 

of instructional level in the content area for which they have been identified to receive services. 

English Language Learners 

Our mission is to help ensure that English Language Learners attain English proficiency and focus on 

academic success while building capacity in critical foreign languages. The Department of English 

Language Learners is responsible for designing professional development to support teachers and 

administrators, improving teaching and learning in the classroom, providing supplemental resources, and 

supporting the implementation of quality, research-based instructional programs for ELL’s. 

We are committed to creating a program in which ELL’s are consistently held to high academic, cognitive, 

linguistic and socio-cultural expectations beginning on the first day of enrollment. These four program 

components are supported by the findings of highly respected researchers in the fields of bilingual 

education, ESL and language acquisition. In addition, instruction must be aligned with student needs and 

language proficiencies in English and the native language. ELL students participating in mainstream 

programs from PK to 12 need substantial support from well-trained teachers who understand the second 

language acquisition process and who support, respect and value bilingual, bicultural learners (Collier, 

2009). 

Physical Education 

The Austin Independent School District sees its mission as ensuring that all students will progress 

academically and intellectually, and will graduate prepared for personal success and inspired to 

contribute to society. The primary purpose of Austin ISD Physical Education is to provide all students with 

the knowledge, skills and desire to live a healthy and physically active life. Students will develop health 

related fitness, physical competence, cognitive understanding and positive attitudes about physical 

activity so they can adopt a healthy and physically active lifestyle. AISD physical education program 

strives to provide all students an opportunity to learn meaningful content with appropriate instruction. 

Health 

The philosophy and mission for AISD Health Education Department is to teach Health Education through 

a comprehensive integrated approach. Topics include, physical/social/mental health, environmental 

health, consumer health, disease prevention, human sexuality, parenting and paternity awareness, 

nutrition, alcohol, tobacco, drugs, healthy lifestyles, interpersonal skills, goal setting, decision-making, and 

CPR/first-aid/AED. You will also find national and state standards for health education, district 

requirements, current news and research. The high school credit health course covers all of the TEKS for 

Health 8-12th grade and National Health Education Standards. AISDs Health Education curriculum 

includes characteristics of effective health education instruction. 


September 

2012 431

Fine Arts 

The AISD Fine Arts Department shares the following philosophy regarding Fine Arts curriculum and 

instruction: 

Instruction in the Fine Arts is essential for the development of the whole child. 

Fine Arts education is for all students. 

Well-educated students have basic knowledge, skills and appreciation of the Fine Arts. 

The Fine Arts provide unique experiences that combine the physical, mental, social and 

emotional aspects of human existence. 

The Fine Arts are a means of communication beyond the written and spoken word with the self, 

others and the world around us. 

The Fine Arts are a historical component of civilization and a body of knowledge, which provide a 

sense of cultural integrity and a sense of belonging. 

Participation in the Fine Arts maximizes critical thinking skills and creativity. 

Fine Arts education prepares students to be successful, contributing members of society. 

World Languages 

Under the Strategic Plan for 2010-2015, the mission of Austin ISD is to provide all students with an 

education that is high quality, challenging and inspiring so that we accomplish our vision of being an 

outstanding school district from which lifelong learners emerge. The teachers of World Languages are 

committed to this mission by designing and implementing curriculum that continually focuses on 

academic rigor by way of content and knowledge, self-directed learning, critical and creative thinking skills 

and relevance and application. Language instruction and exploration coincide with these tenets and 

contribute to developing students who will be successful in the personal, professional and global arena. 

Educational Technology 

We create, promote and sustain a digital-age learning culture that provides the tools and resources for a 

rigorous, relevant and engaging education. Educational Technology provides digital tools teachers and 

students need to create effective, technology-rich learning environments. 

Career and Technical Education 

The Austin Independent School District in partnership with parents and our community exists to provide a 

comprehensive educational experience that is high quality, challenging, and inspires all students to make 

a positive contribution to society. We provide opportunities for students to acquire 21st century academic 

and technical skills needed for entry into the global workforce and/or postsecondary education in order to 

become contributing members of their community. 

Library Services 

Library programs positively impact literacy, life-long learning and student achievement. Librarians teach 

literature and information skills and collaborate with teachers to integrate them into the curriculum and 

partner with classroom teachers on projects that help students use a variety of resources, conduct 

research, and present their findings. Libraries are supported financially and programmatically by the 

educational community to achieve the mission of the campus and district. Librarians encourage life-long 

learning and literacy as a source of pleasure and power. 


September 

2012 432

Accountability Indicators / Significant Changes 

House Bill (HB) 3 passed by the 81 st Texas Legislature, made significant changes to parts of Chapter 39, 

Public School System Accountability, in the Texas Education Code (TEC). The changes shift the focus of 

the state accountability system from meeting satisfactory standards on the state assessments to meeting 

both satisfactory and college-ready standards on new STAAR assessments. 

The Texas Education Agency created a transition plan for implementation of HB 3. School years 2011-12 

and 2012-13 are transition years. State accountability ratings were suspended for 2011-12, and 2012-13 

will see the release of a limited state system. The full state accountability rating system is expected in 

2013-14. The new state accountability system is likely to look very different from the accountability system 

that has been in place for the last decade. 


September 

2012 433

Academic Assessment & Accountability 

Background & Overview 

Over the course of the last 22 years, the Texas state assessment system has undergone significant 

changes. From 1990 until 2002, the mandated state assessment was the Texas Assessment of Academic 

Skills (TAAS). In 2002-03, assessment at all grade levels became more rigorous with comprehensive 

content expansion and assessment based on knowledge and skills (TEKS) and higher level thinking skills 

that focus on content, context and cognitive level in the format of a new Texas Assessment of Knowledge 

and Skills (TAKS). Most recently, in response to new legislative mandates set forth by the 80 th and 81 st 

Texas Legislatures, the Texas Education Agency created a new set of standardized tests. The State 

Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) is intended to introduce yet more rigor, depth and intensity 

to the testing items and to establish stronger links to postsecondary readiness. The state’s goal in 

developing the new system is that Texas will be among the top 10 states for graduating college-ready 

students by the 2019–2020 school year. 

STAAR tests mathematics and reading for students in grades 3 through 8; writing at grades 4 and 7; 

science at grades 5 and 8; and social studies at grade 8. Grades 3 through 9 began STAAR testing in 

2012. In addition, the STAAR includes fifteen end-of-course (EOC) tests intended to test course-specific 

knowledge. Students who entered high school in fall 2011 and beyond are required to take the End-of- 

Course (EOC) assessment in each subject in which they are enrolled and for which an EOC assessment 

exists. Students must meet a minimum score requirement on each test and meet a cumulative score 

requirement in each subject area in order to graduate. 

A complete set of STAAR passing standards has not yet been issued. The timeline for standard-setting 

activities differs for STAAR grades 3 through 8 and STAAR EOC due to timing of available assessment 

data and different legislative requirements. For STAAR EOC, operational assessment data were available 

from the spring 2011 administrations. Therefore, EOC performance standards were set in February 2012, 

prior to the spring administrations. Passing standards for the grades 3-8 tests are not expected to be 

released until January 2013. 

Because of the delay in standard-setting for STAAR at grades 3-8, data availability is currently limited. 

Results of a TEA-commissioned bridging study allow for comparisons between 2011 TAKS and 2012 

STAAR. The bridging study’s TAKS equivalent standards were commissioned for the purposes of federal 

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) reporting (see below). The final STAAR standards will require a higher 

level of student performance than was required for TAKS. 

With the new assessment system, the Texas Legislature also mandated the development of a new 

accountability system to replace the one that had been in place since 2004. The new system shifts focus 

from meeting satisfactory requirements to providing more emphasis on college readiness, as well as 

measuring progress and closing gaps between high-performing and low-performing groups. 


September 

2012 434

During the 2011-12 year, accountability ratings were suspended; no new state ratings were issued to any 

schools or districts across Texas. The new accountability system is still in development and is expected to 

be released in the spring of 2013. In 2013, new ratings based on STAAR performance will be issued for 

the first time and in 2014 the full system is expected to be in place. 

The district must also continue to comply with federal accountability requirements to receive federal 

school funding. The current federal accountability system has been in place since sweeping educational 

reform occurred with the passing of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 under the leadership of 

President George Bush. 

NCLB supports standards-based education reform based on the premise that setting high standards and 

establishing measurable goals increase student educational achievement outcomes. The focus on 

stronger accountability and emphasis on results is manifested in the concept of Adequate Yearly 

Progress (AYP), a measure of accountability for each state based on standards it submits to the USDE 

for approval. The performance measures must specify incremental increases in proficiency for all 

students and all student groups (White, African American, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged, 

Special Education and Limited English Proficient) that culminate in 100% proficiency for all students by 

2014. Participation in testing is another component of AYP, as all campuses, districts and the state must 

meet a 95% standard of all students tested at specified grade levels. Attendance and graduation rates are 

additional indicators for AYP. 

As AYP requirements continue to get more and more stringent, standards for all student groups continue 

to increase. In response to widespread criticism of NCLB requirements, the current federal administration 

has allowed states to submit waivers. Last year the U.S. Secretary of Education told Congress that 82 

percent of America's schools could fail to achieve AYP this year based on the higher passing standards. 

In February, the U.S. Department of Education invited each state education agency to submit a waiver 

from specific NCLB requirements. On September 6, 2012, the Texas Education Agency announced its 

intent to submit waiver requests to the U.S. Department of Education of certain provisions of the ESEA, 

as amended by P.L. 107-110 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, including waivers to sections on AYP 

calculations and performance targets. Essentially, waivers will be requested to allow Texas to use its own 

testing standards and accountability rating system. The status of the waiver request is pending as of this 

writing. 

State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR) 

The STAAR test is the new state-mandated assessment system used to determine whether students 

have mastered the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). STAAR is administered to students 

yearly beginning in 3rd grade. The STAAR program at grades 3–8 assesses the same grades and 

subjects as were assessed on TAKS. For high school, general subject-area TAKS tests are replaced with 

fifteen STAAR end-of-course (EOC) assessments. 

The focus of the new system is to increase postsecondary readiness requirements so that Texas students 

are more competitive nationally and internationally. At grades 3–8, students will be tested in mathematics 

and reading. Students will also be tested in writing at grades 4 and 7, science at grades 5 and 8, and 

social studies at grade 8. STAAR EOC assessments will be available for Algebra I, geometry, Algebra II, 

biology, chemistry, physics, English I, English II, English III, world geography, world history and US 

history. 


September 

2012 435

The STAAR test is criterion-referenced instrument. A criterion-referenced (CRT) test is a measurement 

that relates test items to specific learning objectives which students have been taught. Since a criterionreferenced 

test measures a student’s performance on each objective, the results are particularly useful in 

instructional planning. Areas of high and low student performance are easily identifiable, and remedial 

programs focusing on deficit areas can be devised. 

STAAR Modified or STAAR Alternate 

The STAAR Modified test assesses students with disabilities who are receiving instruction in the Texas 

Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) but for whom the STAAR test is considered an inappropriate 

measure of their academic progress. Students are assessed at their grade level. The STAAR Modified 

tests are administered on the same schedule as STAAR and are designed to measure mastery of the 

TEKS for their enrolled grade/course accessed through modifications. 

The STAAR Alternate test assesses students who have a significant cognitive disability. Students are 

assessed at their enrolled grade level. The STAAR Alternate assessment is not a traditional paper or 

multiple choice test; students are assessed by their teachers based on the dimensions of a rubric and 

results are submitted through an online instrument. Assessment occurs during a window from January to 

April. STAAR Alternate is designed to measure mastery of the TEKS for their enrolled grade/course 

accessed through prerequisite skills. 

STAAR Spanish and STAAR L 

STAAR Spanish is an administration for English Language Learners (ELLs) in grades 3-5 for whom a 

Spanish-version of STAAR is the most appropriate measure of academic progress. 

STAAR-L is a special administration of STAAR for ELLs who meet requirements for taking the 

linguistically-accommodated tests. STAAR L may be administered to ELL students who: 

are not most appropriately assessed with STAAR Spanish, AND 

have not yet attained a TELPAS advanced high reading rating, AND 

have been enrolled in U.S. schools for 3 years or less (5 years or less if a qualifying asylee or 

refugee). 

Linguistic accommodations are made in order to assist students in overcoming language barriers and 

provide a meaningful assessment of academic knowledge and skills. 

STAAR Performance Categories 

The STAAR assessment system will identify three performance categories. For the general STAAR assessments, 

STAAR Modified and STAAR L, the labels for the performance categories are 

Level III: Advanced Academic Performance 

Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance 

Level I: Unsatisfactory Academic Performance 

For the STAAR Alternate assessments, the performance categories are 

Level III: Accomplished Academic Performance 

Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance 

Level I: Unsatisfactory Academic Performance 


September 

2012 436

Graduation Requirements under STAAR/EOC 

Along with the introduction of STAAR EOC testing, graduation requirements related to assessment have 

changed for students who enter ninth grade in the fall of 2011 and beyond. Graduation requirements will 

vary depending on the type of high school program in which the student enrolls. The three programs are 

the Minimum High School Program (MHSP), the Recommended High School Program (RHSP) and the 

Distinguished Achievement Program (DAP). Students in all programs must meet the following STAAR 

EOC cumulative score requirements: 

Student is required to achieve a cumulative score that is at least equal to the product of the 

number of STAAR EOC assessments required in a content area and the scale score that 

indicates Level II: Satisfactory Academic Performance. 

Student must achieve a minimum, which is set within a reasonable range of the Level II: 

Satisfactory Academic Performance standard, in order for the score to count towards the 

student’s cumulative score. 

A student’s cumulative score is determined using the student’s highest score on each STAAR 

EOC assessment the student is required to take for graduation purposes. 

In addition to the cumulative score requirements, the number of EOC tests required and the performance 

standards that must be met will vary according to which of the three high school programs the student 

enrolls. 

Testing cut scores and EOC cumulative score requirements will be phased in over a 5-year period. For 

details on STAAR Assessment-Related Graduation Requirements go to: 

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147506323 

Graduation Requirements under TAKS 

Students who entered the ninth grade prior to the fall of 2011 are not subject to the STAAR EOC 

graduation requirements. These students will graduate under the requirements of the previous 

assessment system, TAKS. Students must pass four TAKS exit level exams in social studies, Math, ELA, 

Science to graduate. 

Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI) 

The TPRI is a state approved instrument which is used to measure the reading development of young 

students in kindergarten through third grade. The measurement provides for early identification of reading 

skills and comprehension development, thereby giving teachers useful information for targeted 

instructional assistance. The assessment is administered in September to students in grades K – 3. 

TELPAS – Texas English Language Proficiency Observation Protocols 

The TELPAS or Observation Protocol is administered annually to show the progress of Limited English 

Proficient (LEP) students in kindergarten through 12 th grade. The domains assessed are listening, 

speaking, reading and writing in grades K – 2 and listening, speaking and writing in grades 3-12. 

Teachers holistically rate each LEP student’s English language proficiency based on classroom 

observations and daily interactions with the student. The TELPAS tests are administered in March and 

April. 


September 

2012 437

PSAT 

The PSAT is the qualifying examination for the national Merit Scholarship Program and is administered in 

October. The test measures verbal reasoning skills, math problem-solving skills, critical reading skills and 

writing skills that have been developed by students during the course of their education. The PSAT 

serves as a valuable tool to assist students and their parents with early college preparation and planning. 

SAT 

The SAT is a reasoning test that is intended to assess a student's readiness for college.It is administered 

by the College Board and tests knowledge of reading, writing and math. Most students take the SAT 

during their junior or senior year of high school, and many colleges and universities use the SAT to make 

admission decisions. 

ACT 

The ACT is a national college admission examination which covers four skill areas: English, mathematics, 

reading, and science, plus an optional writing test. The ACT is designed to measure what a student has 

learned in school. The ACT includes 215 multiple choice questions and takes approximately three hours 

to complete. 

Student Success Initiative 

Beginning in 2003, students in grade 3 were required to pass the state assessment in reading to be 

promoted. The grade 3 advancement requirement was eliminated in 2010. Beginning in 2005, students in 

grade 5 were required to pass the state assessment in reading and mathematics to be promoted; and 

beginning in 2008, students in grade 8 were required to pass the state assessments in reading and 

mathematics for promotion. The SSI requirements were suspended for 2011-2012 due to delays in 

standard-setting for the STAAR assessments in grades 3-8. SSI requirements will resume in 2013. 


September 

2012 438

Table 129 


SAT Performance 

SAT VERBAL AND MATH AVERAGE SCORES 2008 - 2012 

Year 

Critical Reading Mathematics Total * No. of 

Students 

Took 

AISD State Nation AISD State Nation AISD State Nation Reasoning 

Test in AISD 

2008 506 488 502 530 505 515 1036 993 1017 2337 

2009 502 486 501 526 506 515 1028 992 1016 2224 

2010 500 484 501 527 505 516 1027 989 1017 2373 

2011 493 479 497 521 502 514 1014 981 1011 2747 

2012 497 474 496 523 499 514 1020 973 1010 2774 

1-year change 4 -5 -1 2 -3 0 6 -8 -1 27 

5-year change -9 -14 -6 -7 -6 -1 -16 -20 -7 437 

SAT WRITING AVERAGE SCORES 

2008 - 2012 Total (all subjects) 

Year 

Writing 

AISD State Nation AISD State Nation 

2008 493 480 494 1529 1473 1511 

2009 488 475 493 1516 1467 1509 

2010 487 473 492 1514 1462 1509 

2011 480 465 489 1494 1446 1500 

2012 476 461 488 1496 1434 1498 

1-year change -4 -4 -1 2 -12 -2 

5-year change -17 -19 -6 -33 -39 -13 

* Total of the subjects: Verbal and Math 

Data source: College Board Profile Reports 


September 

2012 439

Table 130 


SAT Performance by Ethnicity 

2008-12 SAT CRITICAL READING, MATH, AND WRITING AVERAGE SCORES BY ETHNICITY 

Ethnicity 

2008 2009 

2010 2011 

2012 

No. CR Math Writing No. CR Math Writing No. CR Math Writing No. CR Math Writing No. CR Math Writing 

Native 

American 13 538 534 511 16 528 538 496 14 574 548 503 20 512 572 504 13 551 553 513 

Asian 122 531 600 524 127 547 605 530 133 543 617 545 150 514 585 512 147 538 602 518 

African 

American 

Mexican or 

Mexican 

American 

Puerto 

Rican 

Other 

Hispanic, 

Latino, or 

Latin 

American 

249 425 441 423 270 419 435 408 278 407 429 395 324 408 427 390 314 416 439 397 

397 451 484 442 468 448 475 439 439 517 488 445 579 433 468 422 656 444 478 426 

13 478 503 468 9 480 499 490 16 504 533 493 13 467 475 426 14 509 530 530 

306 442 464 431 328 444 463 434 383 439 464 432 478 438 465 426 471 438 466 466 

White 1076 563 585 545 875 571 594 554 949 565 589 549 1107 571 591 554 1062 571 590 590 

Other 38 539 527 516 52 534 558 517 31 489 511 466 50 492 526 482 61 523 533 533 

No 

Repsonse 

123 465 474 453 79 489 481 458 52 551 559 519 26 515 517 492 36 494 507 507 

Total 2337 506 530 493 2224 502 526 488 2373 500 527 487 2747 493 521 480 2774 497 523 523 


School 

Table 131 


SAT 2012 

Campus, District, State and National Average Scores 

Number 

Tested 

Critical 

Reading Math Writing ** Total 

Akins 318 431 464 422 1317 

Anderson 357 565 589 539 1693 

Austin 356 522 548 498 1568 

Bowie 555 524 563 503 1590 

Crockett 172 452 471 431 1354 

Eastside Global Tech 8 391 413 375 1179 

Eastside Memorial 32 400 442 391 1233 

Garza 32 566 532 514 1612 

Lanier 178 388 424 370 1182 

LASA 186 658 659 631 1948 

LBJ 113 375 404 362 1141 

McCallum 238 539 553 515 1607 

Reagan 81 367 399 351 1117 

Richards 5 548 518 534 1600 

Travis 143 392 420 376 1188 

AISD 2,774 497 523 476 1496 

State 172,802 474 499 461 1434 

National 1,664,479 496 514 488 1498 


September 

2012 441

Table 132 


FY2012 TAKS Comparison by Student Group 

2010 2011 

2012 

Tests Evaluated: TAKS, TAKS-A for selected 

Grades and Subjects 

Met Standard 

Tests Evaluated: TAKS, TAKS-A, TAKS-M, 

TAKS-Alt for selected Grades and Subjects 

Met Standard 

Tests Evaluated: 

Grades 10-11: TAKS, TAKS-A, 

TAKS-M, 

Grades 3-8: STAAR, STAAR L, 

STAAR M, and EOC as applicable 

for selected Grades and Subjects 

Met Standard a 

State 


2010 

Difference State Austin ISD 

2011 

Difference Austin ISD b 

Reading/ELA 

(70% Standard) 


(N/A c ) 

All Students 90% 87% -3% 90% 88% -2% 88% 

African American 87% 82% -5% 87% 83% -4% 82% 

Hispanic 87% 82% -5% 86% 84% -2% 84% 

White 96% 98% 2% 95% 97% 2% 97% 

Econ Disadv 86% 81% -5% 85% 82% -3% 82% 

Mathematics 



(N/A c ) 

All Students 84% 82% -2% 84% 84% 0% 85% 


Hispanic 81% 77% -4% 81% 80% -1% 81% 

White 91% 95% 4% 91% 95% 4% 95% 

Econ Disadv 79% 74% -5% 79% 78% -1% 79% 

Writing 



(N/A c ) 

All Students 93% 91% -2% 92% 92% 0% 95% 


Hispanic 92% 88% -4% 91% 89% -2% 94% 

White 96% 97% 1% 94% 98% 4% 99% 

Econ Disadv 91% 87% -4% 90% 88% -2% 93% 

Science 



(N/A c ) 

All Students 83% 80% -3% 83% 80% -3% 82% 


Hispanic 78% 72% -6% 78% 74% -4% 76% 

White 92% 96% 4% 92% 96% 4% 96% 

Econ Disadv 76% 70% -6% 76% 71% -5% 73% 




(N/A c ) 

All Students 95% 94% -1% 95% 93% -2% 95% 


Hispanic 94% 92% -2% 94% 91% -3% 93% 

White 98% 99% 1% 98% 99% 1% 99% 

Econ Disadv 93% 90% -3% 93% 90% -3% 93% 

4-year Longitudinal Graduation Rate 

All Students 84.3% 

Class of 2010 

78.6% -5.7% 85.9% 

Class of 2011 

80.0% -5.9% 

African American 78.8% 71.5% -7.3% 80.9% 74.0% -6.9% 

Hispanic 78.8% 72.9% -5.9% 81.8% 75.0% -6.8% 

White 91.6% 89.8% -1.8% 92.0% 89.6% -2.4% 

Econ Disadv 81.9% 73.1% -8.8% 83.7% 77.1% -6.6% 

Annual Dropout Rate (Gr. 7-8) 

School Year 2009-10 School Year 2010-11 

All Students 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 

African American 0.4% 0.2% -0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 

Hispanic 0.3% 0.3% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 

White 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 

Econ Disadv 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.1% 

Class of 2012 

Class of 2012 Graduation 

Tables will be released in the 

TEA 2013 District 

Accountability Data Tables 

School Year 2011-12 

2011-12 Annual Drop Out 

Rate Tables will be released 

in the TEA 2013 District 

Accountability Data Tables 

a Percent met TAKS equivalent standard for grades 3-8 and TAKS passing standard for grades 10 and 11. 

b Comparable state results are not available. 

c State accountability ratings have been suspended for 2012. No standards were set. 


September 

2012 442

Gains in the percentage of students meeting the passing standard were largely evidenced for all groups 

and subjects through the end of the TAKS. In 2012, most grades (except for grades 10-11 for whom the 

new assessment system does not apply) took the STAAR assessment for which standards will not be set 

until January 2013. Using the TAKS equivalent standards, commissioned by the TEA for purposes of 

AYP, most student groups gained or remained the same. 

Table 133 


2012 STAAR EOC Preliminary Results for Texas Big-8 School Districts 

Percentage Meeting Level II (Phase-in 1) Standard - All Students Tested 


Corpus 

Christi 

Dallas 

El Paso 

Fort 

Worth 

Houston 

San 

Antonio 

Ysleta 

State 

English I Reading 69% 60% 56% 59% 55% 59% 53% 64% 68% 

English I Writing 54% 44% 43% 44% 37% 47% 34% 48% 55% 

Algebra I 84% 68% 75% 83% 78% 79% 68% 79% 83% 

Biology 84% 76% 83% 81% 81% 84% 78% 85% 87% 

World Geography 79% 72% 76% 75% 71% 73% 68% 79% 81% 

Source: Texas Assessment Management System - STAAR Assessment Summary Results 2012 

Compared to the peer group districts, AISD’s EOC testers led the Big 8 urban districts in passing rates on 

STAAR End-of-Course exams in English I Reading (69%), English I Writing (54%), Algebra I (84%) and 

World Geography (79%). AISD students were second among the Big 8 districts in Biology (84%). 

. 


September 

2012 443

Table 134 


AYP Preliminary Results 2012 Performance Measures 

Comparison with Peer Group Districts 


District 

Missed AYP-Reading and Math Performance-School Improvement Plan- Stage 3 

Reading (AYP Target 87%) Mathematics (AYP Target 83%) 

All AA His White Eco Sped LEP All AA His White Eco Sped LEP 

Austin 85% * 77% † 81% * 97% 79% † 59% 76% * 83% 68% * 79% * 95% 76% * 56% 78% * 

Aldine ISD 

District 




Aldine 86% 83% 87% 87% 86% 60% 84% 83% 76% 86% 85% 83% 60% 85% 

Arlington ISD 

District 




Arlington 87% 84% 84% 93% 84% † 69% * 80% † 80% 71% 77% 89% 75% 63% 76% 

Dallas ISD 

District 




Dallas 82% 76% 83% 92% 81% 57% * 78% 74% 63% 77% 87% 73% 55% * 74% 

Fort Worth ISD 

District 

Missed AYP-Reading and Math Performance-School Improvement Plan-Stage 3 



Fort Worth 82% 76% 83% † 92% 80% † 64% 77% 76% 64% 78% 88% 74% 58% 76% 

Houston ISD 

District 

Missed AYP-Reading and Math Performance-School Improvement Plan-Stage 3 



Houston 84% 80% 83% 95% 82% 58% * 79% 80% 71% 81% 91% 78% 57% * 80% 

North East ISD 

District 




North East 91% 84% 89% 96% 85% 72% 79% 86% 74% 82% 93% 78% 64% 79% 

Northside ISD 

District 




Northside 91% 88% 90% 95% 87% 71% * 81% 86% 81% 85% 92% 82% * 67% * 81% † 

San Antonio ISD Missed AYP-Reading and Math Performance-School Improvement Plan-Stage 3 

District 



San Antonio 79% * 74% 79% * 85% † 78% * 55% * 74% * 70% 63% 71% 77% 70% 53% * 71% 

* Missed AYP for this performance measure due to the 2% and /or the 1% federal caps 

† Met AYP with Required Improvement 

Missed AYP for this performance measure 

Standards in math and reading AYP increase rapidly each year toward the federal goal of 100% 

proficiency in 2014. In 2012, reading and math standards increased to 87% and 83% respectively. Amid 

the increasing standards, AISD met AYP for the all students group in math but missed AYP for the all 

students group in reading due to the 2% and/or the 1% federal caps. As a district, AISD did not meet 

mathematics and reading standards and will enter Stage 3 of the School Improvement Program. 


September 

2012 444

Accomplishments 

AISD Outperforms Other Urban School Districts in Math and Reading in National Test 

December 7, 2011 - Austin Independent School District fourth and eighth grade students continued to 

outperform their peers in large cities and other urban school districts on the 2011 National Assessment of 

Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as the Nation’s Report Card. NAEP is the only assessment 

that allows valid comparisons among students in urban school districts in 

different states. 

Austin ISD’s 2011 mathematics results demonstrate that the percentage 

of fourth and eighth graders scoring at or above Basic remains higher 

than the percentage of their peers scoring at or above Basic in most 

other TUDA districts and in large city (LC) schools. 

 

 

The percentage of AISD fourth graders scoring at or above Basic (87%) in mathematics was 

significantly higher than that of their peers in 18 TUDA districts , LCs (74%) and national public 

schools (82%). 

The percentage of AISD eighth graders scoring at or above Basic (74%) in mathematics was 

significantly higher than that of their peers in 17 TUDA districts, LCs (63%) and was similar to that 

of their peers in national public schools (72%). 

Although NAEP reading scores across the nation and among all TUDA districts remained relatively flat in 

fourth and eighth grade during 2011, the percentage of AISD students in both grades scoring at or above 

Basic was higher than that of their peers in most large city and TUDA districts. In addition, AISD 

percentages have increased significantly in both grades since 2005 and have increased at a greater rate 

than the state’s percentage. 

 

 

Overall, the percentage of fourth graders scoring at or above Basic in reading (68%) was 

significantly higher than that of their peers in 15 other TUDA districts and LCs (55%) and was 

similar to that of their peers in national public schools (66%). 

The percentage of AISD’s eighth graders scoring at or above Basic reading (71%) was 

significantly higher than 15 other TUDA districts (see Figure 2), LCs (65%) and not significantly 

different from their peers in national public schools (75%). 

NAEP is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics, within the U.S. Department of 

Education. NAEP is a nationally representative assessment that reports on what 

students know and can do in core academic subjects. 

NAEP is the only common assessment taken by students nationwide and provides 

the only consistent comparison between students in those urban districts. Results are 

reported for student populations, and for subgroups of those populations, at the 

national and state levels , and at the district level for the TUDA districts. Since the 


September 

2012 445

NAEP TUDA only tests a sample of the entire district student population, no individual student or campus 

results are issued in the report. 

AISD has participated in the NAEP urban schools assessment since 2005. In 2011, 21 urban school 

districts participated in the TUDA: Albuquerque, Atlanta, Austin, Baltimore, Boston, Charlotte- 

Mecklenburg, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Detroit, District of Columbia, Fresno, Hillsborough County, 

Houston, Jefferson County, Los Angeles, Miami-Dade, Milwaukee, New York City, Philadelphia and San 

Diego. 

For these TUDA districts, results are reported at the district level. School districts can then compare their 

results to the national average for public schools, other similar TUDA districts, similar LCs and the state. 

In this way, the NAEP assessment is unique in that it allows AISD to compare fourth and eighth grade 

students’ performance over time to other similar districts. 

Ten Austin Schools Named to National ‘Higher Performing’ List 

Ten Austin schools have been named to the 2011 list of “Higher Performing” schools by the nonprofit 

National Center for Educational Achievement (NCEA). The list is based on student achievement and 

other factors. The schools are: 

 

 

Secondary School - Anderson HS, Bowie HS, LASA HS, and Ann Richards School for Young 

Women Leaders 

Elementary Schools - Clayton, Doss, Hill, Kiker, McBee, and Zilker. 

In creating its list, NCEA relied on several factors, including multiple years of state test scores, school 

demographics, academic improvement from one year to the next, and whether the school met federal 

standards for student achievement and progress. 

Schools with similar demographics can have very different 

levels of student performance. NCEA developed a method to 

identify schools that grow their students’ academic performance 

more than the performance of students in demographically 

similar schools. NCEA also identifies schools whose students’ 

performance meets NCEA College and Career Readiness 

Targets. 

AISD Test Results for ACT Increases, Exceeds State & National Scores 

September 14, 2011 - On the ACT, AISD’s composite score of 21.3 

was up from last year’s score of 20.9 and was once again higher than 

the state score of 20.8. For the first time, AISD’s composite score 

was slightly higher than the national composite of 21.1. AISD’s 

average ACT scores increased in every area: English, 20.0; 

Mathematics, 22.4; Reading, 21.0; and Science, 21.1. 

The highest score possible on each section of the ACT is 36. 


September 

2012 446

Percentage 

AISD Student Participation in SAT Continues to Increase, Exceeds Statewide Performance 

September 14, 2011- Austin Independent School District (AISD) student participation in the SAT test 

continued to increase in 2011. AISD students outscored their counterparts in the state in Critical Reading, 

Math and Writing, while students’ average score was above that of 

the nation in Math, according to data released by the College 

Board. 

Austin students’ average total score of 1494 points included 493 in 

Verbal (Critical Reading), 521 in Math and 480 in Writing. AISD 

exceeded the state’s average by 48 points. Statewide, students 

scored 479 in Verbal, 502 in Math and 465 in Writing, respectively, for a total average state score of 1446 

points. The overall average SAT score for AISD students was slightly lower than the national SAT 

average score of 1500. 

The SAT represents the level of academic preparedness associated with a high likelihood of college 

success and completion. 

In Austin, 2,747 students took the SAT in 2011—an increase of 374 students (16%) from the previous 

year. ACT test participation also increased from 1,160 in 2010 to 1,231 in 2011, a total increase of 71 

students (6%). 

Austin ISD Graduation Rates Increase for Third Year 

July 11 - Graduation rates for Austin Independent School District's class of 2011 have increased to 80 

percent, according to the Texas Education Agency's recently released report on graduation and 

completion rates. 

Since 2008, graduation rates among AISD's high school seniors have risen steadily from 74.3 to 80 

percent. Each year, the TEA reports graduation rates for the previous school year. Information for the 

past five years is included in the chart. 

82.0 

81.0 

80.0 

79.0 

78.0 

77.0 

76.0 

75.0 

74.0 

73.0 

72.0 

Graduation Rates 2007-2011 

80.0 

78.6 

75.6 

75.3 

74.3 

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

Graduating Class 

The U.S. Department of Education 

uses data such as graduation rates to 

determine whether the district and its 

campuses are meeting the federal 

Adequate Yearly Progress 

requirements under the No Child Left 

Behind act. 

Beginning this year, the DOE requires 

all student groups to be evaluated 

under the NCLB law, which requires all 

student groups must meet the AYP 

graduation rate standard, which is 75 

percent, or the required improvement 

target of one percent. 


September 

2012 447

Austin ISD Post-Secondary Enrollment Rates Increase for the Class of 2011; Five 

Percentage-Point Gain in AISD Graduates Enrolling in Colleges and Universities 

July 26, 2012 - Post-secondary enrollment rates for the Austin Independent School District's class of 2011 

have increased from 62 to 67 percent, according to the National Student Clearinghouse's recently 

released results. In post-secondary enrollment, a student has enrolled in an educational institution after 

graduating from high school. This includes enrollment in two- and four-year- colleges, technical or trades 

schools that may be private or public institutions. 

"Post-secondary enrollment rates are a critical indicator for AISD because they tell us how many of our 

graduates are enrolling in colleges and universities beyond high school." Superintendent Meria 

Carstarphen said. "In today's global economy, higher education provides a powerful path to success." 

Post-secondary enrollment rates for AISD's high school graduates have risen steadily, from 55 percent in 

2002 to 67 percent in 2011. Information for the past 10 years is included in the chart. 

During the fall and spring of the 2010-11 school year, AISD’s Department of Research and Evaluation 

offered interactive seminars for campus leadership teams, which included administrators, school 

improvement facilitators, counselors and teacher leaders. Team 

members from the district created plans to improve college and career 

preparation, and shared them with each of AISD’s high school 

campuses. 

After a dip in post-secondary enrollment rates from 66 percent for the 

class of 2009 to 62 percent for the class of 2010, district staff members 

helped students and their families complete the Free Application for 

Federal Student Aid. 

With the support of the Austin Chamber of Commerce, high schools 

also hosted Financial Aid Saturdays where trained volunteers provided 

help for families completing the FAFSA. 

The increased assistance resulted in AISD senior FAFSA completion rates increasing from 29 percent in 

2010 to 54 percent in 2011. Eighty-four percent of the class of 2011 graduates who enrolled in a postsecondary 

institution completed a FAFSA application. 

A full report of post-secondary enrollment for AISD's class of 2011 will be available in September. The 

report will contain further analysis of post-secondary enrollment by student demographic groups, 

including race, ethnicity and economic status, and the types of post-secondary institutions in which they 

enroll. 


September 

2012 448

Six AISD Schools Make TBEC Honor Roll 

October 19, 2011 This week, the Texas Business and Education Coalition (TBEC) 

released its annual honor roll, and out of 253 schools 

throughout the state that made the list, six were from 

AISD! These Honor Roll schools represent less than 

4% of all public schools in Texas, and include 34 high 

schools, 38 middle schools and 181 elementary 

schools. 

In analyzing every public school in Texas, TBEC considers only the school’s commended 

performance, the state’s highest standard for academic achievement, and sets specific 

targets for schools based on grades served and student demographics. 

This year being the last for the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) 

performance data, TBEC’s standards were the toughest in the 12 -year history of the 

award. 

Congratulations to these AISD schools for being named to the TBEC Honor Roll: 

•Anderson High School 

•Ann Richards School for Young Women Leaders 

•Hill Elementary School 

•Kealing Middle School 

•Liberal Arts and Science Academy (LASA) 

•Oak Hill Elementary School 

Two Austin ISD Schools Earn America’s Best High Schools Designation 

May 25, 2012 - Two high schools in the Austin Independent School District have earned 

places on the Newsweek 2012- list of ‘America’s Best High Schools.’ 

Liberal Arts and Science Academy was ranked 38th in the country, while Anderson High 

School ranked 551st. Rather than focus, as in the past, on one metric (AP tests taken per graduate), 

Newsweek consulted a group of experts to develop a yardstick that fully reflects a school’s success 

turning out college-ready (and life-ready) students. New criteria have six components: graduation rate 

(25%), college matriculation rate (25%), and AP tests taken per graduate (25%), plus average SAT/ACT 

scores (10%), average AP/IB scores (10%), and AP courses offered per graduate (5%). 


September 

2012 449

AISD Uses Results from Rigorous, National Review in Aim for World-Class Standards 

March 29, 2012 - As part of its drive to achieve the community's vision for the Austin Independent School 

District to become nationally recognized as an outstanding school district that instills a passion for lifelong 

learning in all students, the district is pleased to 

announce the results of The Eli and Edythe Broad 

Foundation's diagnostic audit, which ranks AISD among the 

nation's top performing districts in several areas, notably 

strategic planning and financial resource systems. 

AISD is one of only two "promising practice" districts throughout the United States selected by the Broad 

Foundation for the diagnostic audit and among only 14 districts the foundation considered. 

"Austin is setting an example for the nation. AISD is a terrific school district, striving to become world 

class," said Shelley Billig, vice President of RMC Research, an education consulting company that 

collaborated with the Broad Foundation in conducting the review. "The district opened itself to an outside, 

critical eye that affirmed both the district's clear and impressive strengths and a few areas that need more 

attention. We have full confidence that the strong leadership in the district will continue its path to 

improvement and that AISD will become one of the nation's leading school districts." 

Four AISD High Schools Earn National Ranking from U.S. News and World Report 

May 21, 2012 - Four Austin Independent School District high 

schools are among the best in the nation, according to the 2012 

U.S. News and World Report Best High School rankings. Liberal 

Arts Science Academy, Anderson High School, Bowie High 

School and McCallum High School earned national and state recognition in the annual report. 

To be eligible for a state ranking, a school must be awarded a national gold or silver medal. Liberal Arts 

and Science Academy earned a national gold medal for being ranked 54th in the nation and 7th in the 

state. Anderson, Bowie and McCallum High Schools earned silver medals for their rankings. Anderson is 

676th in the nation and 61st in the state, Bowie is 704th in the nation and 64th in the state and McCallum 

is 712th in the nation and 66th in the state. Data was analyzed from more than 21,000 schools across the 

country to determine the rankings. 

174 Austin Seniors Garner Recognition as National Scholars 

2012 – Austin ISD recognizes 174 seniors who earned national recognition for their exemplary 

performance in the National Merit Scholarship Program, the National Hispanic Scholar Award Program, 

and the National Achievement Scholarship Program for 2012. This fall, 174 seniors from the Austin 

Independent School District are being recognized for outstanding academic performance by the National 


September 

2012 450

Merit Scholarship Program, the National Hispanic Recognition Program and the National Achievement 

Scholarship Program. Twenty-one students received recognition in more than one program. 

"We congratulate these students for this remarkable achievement,” Superintendent Meria Carstarphen 

said. “This national recognition earned by these students brings honor to their schools and communities. 

It reminds us of our duty to continue to challenge and inspire students to perform at elevated levels so 

they are prepared for higher education and the workforce.” 

Students are selected based on their scores on the preliminary SAT exam, which they take as juniors. 

Because of their high scores on this assessment, these students are now eligible for scholarship awards 

from institutions of higher education and other grantors. 

These students are now eligible for scholarship awards from institutions of higher education and other 

grantors. 

A breakdown by award category shows: 

 

 

 

 

42 National Merit Finalists 

105 National Merit Semifinalists 

40 Scholars for the National Hispanic Recognition Program 

8 National Achievement Scholars 

AISD Leads Big 8 in Percentage of Schools Achieving AYP; Districts Across Nation Face 

Challenges Amid Increased No Child Left Behind Standards 

August 9, 2012 - Amid increasing No Child Left Behind standards for all student groups, the Austin 

Independent School District is leading the Big 8 - comprised of large, urban school districts in Texas - with 

60 percent of schools meeting the federally mandated Adequate Yearly Progress requirements. Texas 

Education Agency released results from the federal No Child Left Behind accountability system, which 

evaluates schools and districts to determine if they have achieved adequate yearly progress in 

mathematics, reading and graduation or attendance rates, depending on the grade level. 

This year, the Texas AYP proficiency standards for all student groups increased from 80 to 87 percent in 

reading and from 75 to 83 percent in mathematics. State accountability ratings from last year will be held 

for 2012-13 but the preliminary results show that AISD students have made gains on most indicators, 

including state assessment results and attendance and graduation rates. For example: 

•Students in third through eighth grade achieved gains in every subject on the new State of Texas 

Assessments of Academic Readiness; 

•Ninth graders performed well on the state’s new, end-of-course exams relative to other districts, ranking 

first or second on every test compared to the other Big 8 districts; 

•Students’ average attendance increased for the second, consecutive year; 

•AISD’s graduation rate increased to 80 percent; and 

•The district’s post-secondary enrollment increased by five percentage points. 


September 

2012 451

AISD Students Win Honors and Earn Slot to Compete in Global Competition 

After winning honors for creativity and problem solving in regional and state tournaments, a team of five 

high school students are is the first from Austin Independent School District to earn the right to compete 

at Destination ImagiNation's Global Finals — the largest 

creative thinking and problem-solving competition in the 

world. 

Destination ImagiNation, Inc. is an extraordinary non-profit 

organization that provides educational programs for 

students to learn and experience creativity, teamwork and 

problem solving. Annually, it reaches over 100,000 students 

across the U.S. and in more than 30 countries. It has more 

than 1.3 million alumni and a global network of 35,000 

volunteers. 

Garza High School students Azulina Green and Lucy 

Williams in back row, Mimi Strauss, Mo Quinn, and Andrea 

Cañizares-Fernandez from LASA in front row 

students with an exciting, joyful and supportive experience 

Destination ImagiNation, Inc. began in the summer of 1999, 

when nearly 200 international volunteers united to create a 

global creative problem solving program that would provide 

U.S. Congressman Lamar Smith Congratulates O. Henry Middle School 

For National Honor 

June 28, 2012 - Congressman Lamar Smith congratulated O. Henry Middle school staff members for 

being named 2012 Schools to Watch by the National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform. The 

staff members were in Washington, D.C. for the National Forum's 8th annual Schools to Watch 

conference. 

"The principal and staff members at O. Henry Middle school deserve 

our appreciation and gratitude for their extraordinary efforts on behalf 

of our children," Congressman Smith said. "I hope that O. Henry 

continues to serve as a shining example of how talented teachers 

and engaged administrators can shape the minds and futures of 

America's children." 

O. Henry earned the recognition for challenging students to use their minds well, being sensitive to the 

unique developmental challenges of early adolescence and providing every student with high-quality 

teachers and resources. 

The National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform is an alliance of more than 60 educators, 

researches and officers of national associations and foundations dedicated to improving schools for 

young adolescents across the country. 


September 

2012 452

Graham Elementary School Earns 2012 National Blue Riboon School Recognition 

September 11, 2012 - The Austin Independent School District's Graham Elementary School has earned 

the prestigious recognition of being named a 2012 National Blue Ribbon School by the U.S. Department 

of Education. Graham is the only Central Texas school—and 

among only 20 schools in the state—recognized for overall 

academic excellence or for making progress in improving student 

academic achievement levels. 

The Department of Education has honored Graham as an 

"Exemplary Improving" school. The classification recognizes 

schools, where at least 40 percent of students are from 

disadvantaged communities, that demonstrate the most progress 

in improving student achievement levels. 

This notable achievement puts Graham in an elite group: Just 18 

schools in Texas and 269 schools across the nation were named 

National Blue Ribbon Schools for 2012 based on their overall 

academic excellence or for making progress in improving student academic achievement levels. In 

November, the Education Department will honor Graham and 218 other public schools and 50 private 

schools at a ceremony in Washington. 

As successful schools go, Graham defies many stereotypes. It's not rich, it's located on the wrong side of 

town (east of Interstate 35) and has a student enrollment that is 94 percent Hispanic and African 

American and 95 percent economically disadvantaged. Against such odds, Graham is soaring. In 2007, 

newly arrived principal Blain Helwig saw Graham's potential and picked up the pace. 

Helwig believed the school would succeed if teachers and administrators found a way to quickly and 

effectively bring kids up to their grade levels and intervene quickly when they fell behind. He made three 

key changes that yielded big results. Working with teachers, he created a culture of hard work at the 

school "for students and faculty." He put in place what he called stopgap academic programs to rapidly 

accelerate kids who were behind or fell behind. And he tightened discipline. "Discipline is paramount," 

Helwig said. "The kids, teachers and community must know that the school is a learning center." We find 

it interesting that Helwig has focused almost entirely on what is happening at school instead of children's 

home environments. 

Helwig's formula for success is not fancy, but it's obviously effective. The school has been ranked 

"exemplary" by the state in 2011, 2010 and 2009. That is akin to earning an A. It kept that ranking this 

year, which is a transitional year for Texas public schools that are under a new statewide testing system, 

called STAAR for State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness. Because of that, schools retained 

their state ratings from 2011. 

"We have been fortunate to have consistently produced stellar academic results at Graham," Principal 

Blaine Helwig said. "Being selected for this award is both humbling and a culmination of our dedication 

toward improving students' lives." 

The Texas Education Agency rated Graham as an exemplary school in 2011 and the campus earned 

gold performance acknowledgements for commended performance in reading, writing, mathematics and 

science. Last year, Helwig was a finalist for H-E-B's statewide, outstanding principal award and a finalist 

for AISD's principal of the year award. 


September 

2012 453

Austin High School Earns UIL State Championship, Makes History 

May 31, 2012 - The Stephen F. Austin High School Red Dragons and theatre directors, Billy Dragoo, 

Shannon Tipton, and Ann Dragoo, earned first place at the 

University Interscholastic League (UIL) 5A State One-Act Play 

Contest! Austin High School is the only 5A high school in UIL 

State One-Act Play history that has won two consecutive 

championships! 

The award-winning play performed by the Red Dragons was 

"King Of The Moon," by Tom Dudzick. 

The troupe's production of King O' the Moon earned each of 

the actors an award during the district, area, region and state competitions. Felipe Ramirez, Austin High 

school student, earned the prestigious honor of best actor during the state competition. 

Dragon Players Theater Troupe 

pictured, right to left 

Top Row: Martin Ramirez, Bonnie 

Nolan, Louise Root, Maura Kampa, 

Richard Dent, Billy Rainey, Kayle 

Litz, Ian Erbe, Shannon Tipton 

(Assistant Director) 

Bottom Row: Billy Dragoo 

(Director), Haley Wilson, Katherine 

Schroeder, Riley Ryan-Wood, 

Jasmin Weber, Aubrey Elenz, Felipe 

Ramirez, Catherine Schwartz, Annie 

Dragoo (Assistant Director) 

The Dragon Players theatre troupe has won the One-Act Play state championship in 2012, 2011 and 

2009. 

More than 14,000 Texas high school students in more than 1,000 plays participate in 300 plus contests, 

which take place from the beginning of March through the three-day, 40-production State Meet One-Act 

Play Contest. The UIL One-Act Play contest is a competition where similarly sized Texas schools present 

an 18-40 minute play This is Austin’s sixth consecutive year competing at State level, putting Austin High 

and director Billy Dragoo in a very unique place in UIL history. They are one of only two high schools and 

directors who have advanced to the state level five years in a row in conference 5A. 


September 

2012 454

Crockett HS Student Invited to U.S. National High School Mathematics Championship 

May 25, 2012 - Although Benjamin Henderson will earn his diploma from Crockett High School next 

week, he will continue to represent the school and Austin Independent School District. The American 

Society for Mathematics has invited him to compete in the U.S. National High School Mathematics 

Championship in Oklahoma City. 

Henderson earned a top score on the Problem Solving Challenge Examination, which qualified him for 

the national competition. 

The U.S. National High School Mathematics Championship is June 30 to July 1. 

Dobie Middle School's College Preparatory Academy Receives National Recognition for 

High Performance 

April 23, 2012 - J. Frank Dobie College Preparatory Academy has been selected as a National 

Demonstration Site for Advancement Via Individual Determination, a kindergarten through postsecondary 

school system that has supported thousands of students to become confident, college-going scholars. 

Dobie, along with more than 120 other AVID National Demonstration 

sites across the country, was selected through an application screening 

and review process, which included a site visit by a validation team 

from AVID's headquarters in San Diego. 

With AVID in place throughout subject area classes, performance 

levels improve significantly for all students, but especially for those 

students who have historically been underrepresented in 

postsecondary education. Schools from around the world that are preparing to implement the AVID 

system will visit National Demonstration Sites, such as this one, to observe a highly evolved AVID 

system. Jim Nelson, AVID Executive Director, said, "Dobie was selected as a National Demonstration 

Site because it has implemented the AVID system throughout the school and can serve as a model for 

new AVID sites." 

Clayton Math Pentathlon Team Named 2012 National Champions 

May 17, 2012 - Clayton Elementary School's Math Pentathlon team has been named the 2012 National 

Champions. The students will be recognized tomorrow at a special school assembly. Math Pentathlon is a 

program of interactive problem-solving games, designed to motivate and strengthen basic math concepts 

and skills for students in kindergarten through 7th grade. 

This is the fifth year Clayton students have participated in the program. They claimed the national title in 

2008 and earned the Texas state trophy in 2009. 


September 

2012 455

Students Named Semi-finalists in Prestigious Siemens Competition 

December 6, 2011-Four AISD students have been named semifinalists in the 2011 Siemens Competition 

in Math, Science & Technology, the nation’s premier science research competition for high school 

students. This competition recognizes remarkable talent early on, fostering individual growth for high 

school students who are willing to challenge themselves through science research. Students also have an 

opportunity to achieve national recognition for science research projects that they complete in high 

school. 

The semi-finalists are: 

•Serena Zadoo, Anderson High School 

•Ashvin Roharia, Jessica Wang and Aydin Zahedivash, Liberal Arts and Science Academy High 

School (LASA) 

These were among only 300 students that were honored nationwide. This year’s competition had an 

unprecedented 1,541 projects submitted. 

Congratulations to all the student winners, Anderson Principal Donna Houser and LASA Principal Stacia 

Crescenzi! 

About the Siemens Foundation: Administered by the College Board, the Siemens 

Competition awards college scholarships ranging from $1,000 to $100,000 in 

individual and team categories. The Siemens Foundation provides more than $7 

million annually in support of educational initiatives in the areas of Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in the United States. Its 

signature programs include the Siemens Competition in Math, Science & 

Technology, Siemens Awards for Advanced Placement, and The Siemens We 

Can Change the World Challenge, which encourages K-12 students to develop 

innovative green solutions for environmental issues. 

Austin High School Debate Honored Nationally 

September 19 - Austin High Debate was honored by the National Forensic League (NFL) with 

membership into the prestigious "100 Club". The AHS chapter 

received 100 degrees or more last year propelling them into the top 

10% of NFL chapters in the nation. Degrees reflect levels of 

distinction based on performance based points earned. The 

Congratulations to Mr. Mast and his team! 

The National Forensic League is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit honor 

society created to recognize high school students in speech and debate. It is the oldest and largest 

interscholastic forensic organization. 

More than 120,000 high school and middle school students, representing nearly 3,000 high schools and 

middle schools nationwide, are building their communication, leadership, cognitive, and presentational 

skills as members. Since 1925, more than 1.3 million students have found their voice in the NFL. 


September 

2012 456

AISD Elementary Students Runners-Up in National Energy Competition 

May 29, 2012 - As homeowners look for ways to save money on their energy bills, a team of eight fifth 

grade students at Bryker Woods Elementary successfully reduced energy at their homes, earning them 

recognition as a runner-up in the America's Home Energy Education Challenge. The team reduced 

energy use by 2.8 percent, which is one percent more than the savings from a major investment of 

installing weather stripping in a home. 

Austin Energy partnered with the Bryker Woods team to provide outlet insulation templates, weather 

stripping, two compact fluorescent bulbs and an energy meter. One of the members who saved the most 

energy at home unplugged an additional refrigerator. The other team members turned off lights and 

electronics not in use. 

America's Home Energy Education Challenge encourages teams of 

third through eighth grade students to work with their science teachers 

and local utility companies to develop energy savings plans that 

reduce the amount of energy used to power their homes. Each student 

measured energy consumption in their homes between September and 

November 2011 and compared it to data collected during the same 

three-month period the year before. 

Bedichek Junior Marines Earn Three National Titles 

April 17, 2012 - After competing in their first National Middle School Drill 

Championship in Dallas, 25 students in Bedichek Middle School's Junior 

Marines Leadership Program won three national titles in Unarmed Color 

Guard, Armed Drill and Overall Color Guard. In preparation for the 

competition, students 

practiced two hours daily, 

Monday through Thursday, 

and four hours Saturday. In 

order to participate, students 

were required to maintain 

passing grades in all course work. 

Darrick A. Norton, former Marine Staff Sergeant and 

Bedichek teacher, leads the program. Created in the spring 

of 2006, the Bedichek Junior Marines Leadership program 

was designed to instill values such as integrity, dependability, loyalty, unselfishness and tact. The threeyear 

program offers training in leadership and physical endurance, drill and ceremonies, teamwork and 

daily personal discipline. 


September 

2012 457

Zavala Student Wins National Hispanic Heritage Safety Poster Contest 

December 19, 2011 - Zavala Elementary held an assembly in honor of fifth grade student, Sofía Valadez 

who won the national Hispanic Heritage Safety Poster Contest, put on by the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children (NCMEC). The contest is held annually during Hispanic Heritage Month to teach 

elementary school children in Hispanic communities about safety. 

During 2011, more than 200 posters from elementary students in 

Florida, Georgia, New York and Texas were submitted. Entrants were 

asked to design the posters around the proposed theme, "Reglas de 

Seguridad Cuando Voy y Vengo de la Escuela / Safety Rules When 

Going To and From School” and were judged based on originality of 

design, reflection of the contest theme and use of color and materials. 

Sofía worked with her art teacher, Laurel Goetz, and was awarded 

first place. For that she was received a mini laptop and a framed copy 

of her poster from a NCMEC representative. The poster will be printed on a safety tip bookmark that is 

distributed to other schools, community centers and libraries. 

The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization established in 

1984. 

AISD Students Win Honors at ExxonMobil Texas Science and Engineering Fair 

April 5, 2012 - Five AISD students were recognized as brilliant scientists at this year's ExxonMobil Texas 

Science and Engineering Fair. The state competition, hosted by The University of Texas at San Antonio 

(UTSA) College of Sciences, drew more than 1,000 young Texans. 

The state-level competition offered students who placed at regional science fairs the opportunity to vie for 

top prizes and college scholarships as well as a spot at the international science fair. To be eligible to 

participate in the EMTSEF, students won first through third place or grand prize at one of 12 regional fairs 

held across Texas. 

Sydney Hutton (right), a freshman at Bowie High School, earned one of 

the top awards in the fair’s senior division. The young scientist received 

First Grand Prize in the senior division for her behavioral and social 

sciences project: “The Effects of Organic Labeling on Taste Perception.” 

Other AISD students to take home awards included: 

 

 

 

 

Bryson Hill, Murchison Middle School, second place in juniordivision 

mathematical sciences; 

Alex Crisara, Anderson High School, fourth place in seniordivision 

engineering: electrical/mechanical; 

Serena Zadoo, Anderson High School, fifth place in seniordivision 

environmental sciences/analysis; and 

Mia Spennato, Murchison Middle School, fifth place in juniordivision 

biochemistry. 


September 

2012 458

2012 Scholastic Art and Writing Awards Earned by Two AISD Students 

CONGRATULATIONS to Othon Tejeda and Michael Johnson, art students at Stephen F. Austin High 

School, for earning national recognition in the 2012 Scholastic Art and Writing Awards of 2012, presented 

by the Alliance for Young Artists and Writers! 

Othon received a Gold National Art award 

and Michael received a Silver National Art 

(Photography) award. 

These students have been identified by 

panels of professional artists as the most 

talented young artists in the nation. 

This year 200,000 works of art and writing 

were submitted, and only the top 1,500 were 

recognized at the national level! 

Othon's piece will be exhibited throughout 

the United States for the next two years - 

beginning at Parsons The New School of 

Design (New York City) and at The U.S. 

Department of Education, President's 

Committee on the Arts and Humanities in 

Washington, D.C. 

My Grandpa’s Home , above, by Othon Tejeda 

These students and their art teachers, Mr. Jeff 

S-Martinez and Ms. Melanie Sherwood have 

been invited to attend a ceremony at Carnegie 

Hall in New York City on June 1 and to 

participate in showcase events at Parsons The 

New School for Design. 

These are the highest national recognition in art 

a student can receive. Less than thirty works 

from the state of Texas were selected. 

OUNG ARTISTS AND WRITE2012 

Scholastic Art and Writing Awards 

Michael Johnson's photo, above, is entitled "Dreams 

ARTISTS AND WRITERS 

Adrift." 

ALLIANCE FOR YOUNG ARTIS YOUNG ARTISTS As 


September 

2012 459

AISD UIL State Level Competitors 

The University Interscholastic League was created by The University of Texas at Austin to provide 

leadership and guidance to public school debate and athletic teachers. Since 1910 the UIL has grown into 

the largest inter-school organization of its kind in the world. The UIL continues to operate as part of the 

University of Texas, under the auspices of the Vice President for Diversity & 

Community Engagement. 

The UIL exists to provide educational extracurricular academic, athletic, and 

music contests. The initials UIL have come to represent quality educational 

competition administered by school people on an equitable basis. AISD is 

proud to recognize the students who excelled several levels of competition to be able to compete at State 

Level. 

AISD State Level Competitors-Athletics 

Kevin Ku, 4th in Individual Medley at State Swimming-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Destini Gorrer, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Dana Broadnax, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Jazmin Ochoa, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Macahla Wesley, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Kyana Norwood-alternate, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Alaeh Horne-alternate, 4x100 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Destini Gorrer, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Dana Broadnax, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Kyana Norwood, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Macahla Wesley, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Jazmin Ochoa-alternate, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Alaeh Horne-alternate, 4x200 meter relay-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Michele Guerrero, 3rd at State Wrestling- Akins High School 

Brian Dorsey, 2nd at State Wrestling-Bowie High School 

Will Becker, 3rd at State Wrestling-Bowie High School 

Evalynn Reyna, 3rd at State Wrestling-Bowie High School 

AISD State Level Competitors-Academics 

Carl Heiser, 3 rd Place Journalism-Bowie High School 

Amav Sastry, 5 th Place Computer Science- LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Roger Cain, 1 st Place Editorial Writing; 4 th Place News Writing-LBJ Comprehensive High School 

Seren Villwock, 4 th Place Headline Writing-McCallum High School 

Mary Stites, 5 th Place Headline Writing-McCallum High School 

AISD State Level Competitors-Music 

Jackson Ellinger, Viola-McCallum High School 

Andy Rogers, Bass-McCallum High School 

Daniel Ranry, Percussionist-Bowie High School 

Joe Walden, Mallet Percussion-McCallum High School 

John Walden, Trumpet-McCallum High School 

Trevor Villwock, Piano-McCallum High School 

Sydney Barber, Music Theory-McCallum High School 


September 

2012 460

Louis Raymond-Kolker, Mallet Percussion-McCallum High School 

Nick Erck, Choir Member-Anderson High School 

Rebecca Teng, Flutist-Anderson High School 

Kealing Middle School Band Honored Nationally 

2011 Sudler Cup Recipient 

The Sudler Cup is an award bestowed to identify, recognize, and honor junior high and middle school 

concert band programs that have demonstrated particularly significant high standards of excellence in 

concert activities over a period of several years. The official description of a deserving band is as follows: 

The band must have achieved and maintained a high standard of literature in the concert area over a period of 

several years. The concert band will have placed itself in situations where there has been opportunity for evaluation 

by qualified persons or has been rated "superior" at state, regional, or national levels in concert activities. The band 

should have performed at regional, state, national, and professional meetings of significance. These can include, 

but are not limited to, state music conventions, regional or national MENC meetings, and state or national band 

association conventions. The director must have been incumbent in his/her position for at least seven years, 

including the current year. A number of the students in the band should have participated in district and all-state 

honor bands or similar all-area groups. The total program of music should exemplify what is considered a sound 

viable, music education program for this level of endeavor. 

Kealing in one of four middle schools nationally to be awarded the 2011 Sudler Cup. 

2011 National Wind Band Class AA National Winner 

The Kealing Middle School Wind Ensemble was selected as a Class AA National Winner for 2011 by the 

National Wind Band Honors Project. The Wind Ensemble was one of eight middle school bands in the 

nation to receive this honor. 

Texas Foreign Language Association Recognizes Two AISD Teacher 

November 18, 2011 The Texas Foreign Language Association (TFLA) has named 

Ms. Kelly Long (pictured left), the 2011 TFLA Chinese Teacher of the Year. Ms. Long 

is the Chinese teacher at Anderson High School. Ms. Long also has been granted 

acceptance into the prestigious Hanban Network of Confucius Classrooms. 

As part of this recognition, Ms. Long participated in an interview conducted by the 

TFLA committee during their fall conference in October as a candidate for the TFLA 

Top Teacher of the Year Award. 

Ms. Rachel Tennen, (pictured right) French 1 & 2 teacher at Akins High School 

was selected as the Texas Foreign Language Association’s New Teacher of the 

Year for 2012. She was recognized during the Saturday luncheon of the fall 

conference in October 13. 

TFLA is a non-profit organization at the state level whose mission is to advance 

the study of modern and classical languages at all levels of instruction. 


September 

2012 461

Austin ISD Again Leads Texas in Number of National Board Certified Teachers 

April 23, 2011 - For the ninth straight year, the Austin School District leads the 

state with more National Board Certified Teachers than any other school district 

in Texas. The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards has 

announced that 30 Austin teachers have earned National Board Certification, 

bringing to 243 the total number of National Board Certified Teachers in AISD for 

the 2011-2012 school year. 

A three-year study by the National Research Council of the National Academies affirms National Board 

Certification has had a positive impact on student achievement, teacher retention and professional 

development. 

Austin ISD Teacher Wins James F. Venniga Outstanding Teaching of Humanities Award 

Linda O'Neal of Akins High School has been named the 2010-11 recipient of the James F. Veninga 

Outstanding Teaching of the Humanities Award. Each year Humanities Texas, 

the state affiliate of the National Endowment for the Humanities, honors eleven 

teachers with their Outstanding Teacher of the Humanities awards. The James 

F. Veninga Outstanding Teaching of the Humanities Award honors James F. 

Veninga, Humanities Texas Executive Director Emeritus, for his twenty-three 

years of extraordinary contributions to the public humanities in Texas and the 

U.S. This winning teacher is chosen from among the nominees for the 

Outstanding Teaching of the Humanities Award, receives a $5,000 prize, with 

$500 payable to his or her school to purchase instructional materials. 

Ms. O'Neal was nominated for the Outstanding Teaching of the Humanities 

award by State Representative Valinda Bolton. Her Akins colleagues, among which are those who wrote 

letters of support in her nomination such as Charles Moody, are thrilled about her honor. Said one, "This 

is a well-deserved honor for someone who has consistently shown how much she cares for our students 

and is always finding ways to keep them engaged." 

When asked why she chose to go into the teaching profession and, given the rate of attrition in the 

profession, why she continues, O'Neal had this to say: "I've always had a strong belief in social justice 

and a sincere belief that all students, including our at-risk students, can rise to the occasion and excel... 

and I believe teachers can create the change necessary and empower students in order to make this 

happen." 

Linda O'Neal is a graduate of Lanier High School, student taught at Anderson High School in 2003 and 

joined the Akins High School faculty the following year. She teaches U.S. History, A.P. U.S. History, and, 

in conjunction with Austin Corps, a Government Internship program. Currently students from this program 

are doing internships at sites such as the City of Austin Mayor's office and the Department of Homeland 

Security. 


September 

2012 462

AISD Assistant Athletic Director Enters Hall of Fame 

July 24, 2012 - Lynn Davis Pool, Austin Independent School District's assistant athletic director, has been 

inducted into the Texas Girls Coaches Association 2012 Hall of Fame. 

"It is a tremendous honor to be recognized by your peers," Pool, who was inspired 

by her high school basketball coach to choose coaching as a profession, said. "I 

admire the legends in who are in the TGCA Hall of Fame. They are all coaches I 

have looked up to for many years." 

After serving as the head basketball coach and girls athletic director at Lubbock- 

Cooper High School, Pool was a defensive basketball coach at the University of 

Texas at Austin, where her team won the national championship with a perfect 

season of 34 wins. During the 1984 Olympics, Pool was a national floor coach for 

the basketball tournaments. Pool was the head girls basketball coach at Bowie 

High School from 1990 to 2009 and was then promoted to her current position as 

the district's assistant athletic director. 

The Texas Girls Coaches Association is one of the largest associations of coaches in the United States. It 

started in 1953 with less than 100 members and has grown to more than 5,000 members who are 

coaches and administrators in all levels of education. 

Austin High School Director Receives State and National Recognition 

CONGRATULATIONS to Billy Dragoo, Theatre Director at Stephen F. Austin 

High School, for being selected as a recipient of the 2011 University 

Interscholastic League (UIL) Sponsor/Director Excellence Award! Under his 

directorship, Austin High has competed at State level for an unprecedented six 

consecutive years. 

The purpose of the award is for UIL to highlight the contributions of sponsors of 

UIL scholastic competition. This award is created to identify and recognize 

outstanding sponsors who assist students in developing and refining their 

extracurricular talents to the highest degree possible within the educational 

system while helping them to keep their personal worth separate from their 

success or failure in competition. The Award The Sponsor/Director Excellence 

Award winners receive a $1,000 cash award and an appropriate symbolic 

memento. All nominees will receive a personalized certificate from UIL. 

After Mr. Dragoo and his troupe won state with Mr. Dragoo's one-act version of Mr. Dudzick's play, Mr. 

Dudzick decided to revise and release his play as two one-act versions, inspired by Mr. Dragoo's own 

cutting of the original. On the acknowledgment page, he credits Mr. Dragoo and his actors for the 

inspiration. 

Billy Dragoo taught at Granbury High School (which he took to UIL State Level twice) and Bowie High 

School in Arlington before coming to Austin High in the fall of 1993. Mr. Dragoo earned a BFA from The 

University of Texas in 1987 and a Master of Arts from The University of London in 1990. 

In the summer of 2002, Mr. Dragoo was granted a scholarship to study at the Globe Theatre in London. 

While teaching at Austin High, he has three times been named “Teacher of the Year” -- in 1997 and 2003 

and 2011. 


September 

2012 463

Austin School District Earns ASBO Budget Award 

For a second consecutive year, The Association of School Business Officials 

International (ASBO) has awarded the Austin School District its Meritorious 

Budget Award (MBA) for excellence in budget presentation of the 2011-12 

Budget. To earn this award, the District submitted its 2011-12 Budget for a 

rigorous review based on ASBO’s stringent criteria. The MBA criteria guide school 

business officials toward a quality school budget presentation by enhancing 

officials’ skill in developing, analyzing, and presenting a school district budget. 

The Association of School Business Officials International, founded in 1910, is a professional association 

of more than 5,000 members that provides programs and services to promote the highest standards of 

school business management practices, professional growth, and the effective use of educational 

resources. This was the second time the district participated and submitted its budget. 

AISD Earns Nationally Recognized GFOA Budget Award 

The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada 

(GFOA) has awarded the Austin School District its Distinguished Budget 

Presentation Award for 2011-12. To receive the budget award, AISD had to satisfy 

nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget presentation. These 

guidelines are designed to assess how well an entity's budget serves as a policy 

document, a financial plan, an operations guide, and a communications device. 

Budget documents must be rated "proficient" in all four categories, and in the 14 

mandatory criteria within those categories, to receive the award. 

Austin ISD Earns Highest Award from Texas Comptroller for Financial Transparency 

November 2, 2011 - Austin Independent School District earned the 2011 Gold Leadership Circle Award 

for a second year in a row from the Texas Comptroller. The Gold Leadership Circle Award is presented to 

cities, counties and school districts which meet the highest standard for financial transparency online. 

A government agency can initially be considered for the award if three key 

financial documents are posted online. Those documents are the annual budget, 

annual financial report and the check register. Other factors considered in the 

Gold Leadership Circle Award include sharing information in a user-friendly 

format that provides ease of access and providing consistent information of 

spending. 


September 

2012 464

AISD Named Top Performing District by the Council of the Great City Schools 

May 8, 2012 - The Austin Independent School District has earned the Top Performing 

District award for its management of business operations services in 2011 from the 

Council of the Great City Schools. This recognition is based on key performance 

measures that demonstrate efficient and effective use of resources in the critical 

areas of child nutrition, maintenance and operations, safety and security and student 

transportation. 

"We are honored by the recognition from a national organization 

that represents the needs of urban public schools," Lawrence 

Fryer, Chief Operations Officer, said. "Our goal is to ensure every 

department within the district is managed efficiently, so we can deliver the best 

possible education to our students." 

The Council of the Great City Schools is the only national organization exclusively representing the needs 

of urban public schools. The organization, which comprises 67 large-city school districts, provides a 

network of resources to collectively address challenges of urban districts. 

AISD ISD Recognized Nationally for Use of Green Power 

May 29, 2012 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ranks AISD second in the nation in the 

use of green power among K-12 school districts. The EPA produces a list annually of the Top 20 K-12 

schools. The Top 20 K-12 Schools list represents the largest purchasers 

among K-12 school partners within the Green Power Partnership. The 

combined green power purchases of these organizations amounts to 

more than 220 million kilowatt-hours of green power annually, which is 

the equivalent amount of electricity needed to power more than 19,000 

average American homes each year. Locally, the District also achieved 

the Austin Energy Green Building Program's five-star rating in the construction of the McCallum Arts 

Center. 


September 

2012 465

Demographical & Statistical 

Table 135 


Population Analysis 

United States 2 

Austin 1 

Travis County 2 

Texas 2 

Fire Protection 1 Recreation 1 

Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage 

Year Population Change Population Change Population Change Population Change 

1940 87,930 -- 111,053 -- 6,414,824 -- 132,165,000 -- 

1950 132,459 50.64% 160,980 44.96% 7,711,194 20.21% 151,326,000 14.50% 

1960 186,545 40.83% 212,136 31.78% 9,579,677 24.23% 179,323,000 18.50% 

1970 253,539 35.91% 295,516 39.30% 11,198,655 16.90% 203,302,000 13.37% 

1980 345,496 36.27% 419,573 41.98% 14,228,383 27.05% 222,110,000 9.25% 

1985 406,584 17.68% 527,120 25.63% 16,370,000 15.05% 238,740,000 7.49% 

1990 450,830 10.88% 576,407 9.35% 16,986,510 3.77% 249,632,692 4.56% 

1995 523,352 16.09% 656,979 13.98% 18,724,000 10.23% 262,755,000 5.26% 

2000 628,667 20.12% 749,426 14.07% 20,044,141 7.05% 272,690,813 3.78% 

2005 695,881 10.69% 906,919 21.02% 22,678,651 13.14% 295,734,134 8.45% 

2006 714,237 2.64% 921,006 1.55% 23,507,783 3.66% 299,398,484 1.24% 

2007 732,381 2.54% 974,365 5.79% 23,904,380 1.69% 301,621,157 0.74% 

2008 746,105 1.87% 998,543 2.48% 24,326,974 1.77% 304,059,724 0.81% 

2009 770,296 3.24% 1,026,158 2.77% 24,782,302 1.87% 307,006,550 0.97% 

2010 778,560 1.07% 1,024,266 -0.18% 25,145,561 1.47% 308,745,538 0.57% 

2011 805,662 3.48% 1,024,266 * 0.00% 25,674,681 2.10% 311,591,917 0.92% 

Number of Stations 45 District Parks 13 

Number of Employees 3 1,151 Metropolitan Parks 12 

Number of Fire Emergency Responses 81,982 Natural Preserves 15 

Number of Fire Responses 3,208 Neighborhood Parks 79 

Number of Employees per 1 Special Parks (museums and miscellaneous) 39 

Police Protection 1 

1,000 Population 5 Open Fields 103 

Veloway 

3 miles 

Hike and Bike Trails 

199 miles 

Greenbelts 40 

Number of Employees 4 2,344 

Number of Law Offenses 146,277 

Number of Arrests 42,220 Golf Courses 5 

Patrol Units 349 Swimming Pools 52 

Number of Employees per 3 Athletic Fields 174 

1,000 Population 5 Softball Fields 32 

Tennis Courts 110 

Library 1 

Central and Branch Libraries 23 Recreation Centers 20 

Volumes in Collection 1,454,103 Youth Entertainment Complex 1 

Library Volumes Borrowed 4,663,583 Senior Activity Centers 3 

Registered Library Borrowers 519,788 

1. Source - City of Austin Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Year Ended September 30, 2011, unless noted otherwise. 

2. Source - U.S. Bureau of the Census * 2011 Population for Travis County is unavailable 

3. Source - City of Austin Fire Department 

4. Source - City of Austin Police Department 

5. Represents sworn and civilian employees 


September 

2012 466

Table 136 


Economic and Growth Indicators 

Area of 

Effective Buying 

Incorporation 1 Utility Connection Income (EBI) 1 

Median 

Household 

Per 

Capita 

Year Sq. Miles Population Electric 1 Water 2 Gas 3 EBI EBI 

$ $ 

2002 273.10 671,044 359,358 182,977 193,278 47,089 25,109 

2003 275.58 674,719 363,377 184,659 199,042 41,909 22,420 

2004 290.75 683,551 369,458 188,441 203,966 39,227 21,487 

2005 293.57 695,881 372,735 192,511 207,686 40,335 21,938 

2006 296.25 714,237 380,696 197,511 218,500 40,888 35,413 

2007 297.00 732,381 388,626 199,671 222,000 42,263 38,243 

2008 298.00 746,105 396,791 206,695 219,470 46,340 39,010 

2009 302.00 770,296 407,926 208,487 223,048 47,520 38,518 

2010 306.00 778,560 413,870 214,470 225,321 48,460 35,798 

2011 308.00 805,662 417,865 212,754 228,213 46,689 38,484 

2002-2011 

Change 12.05% 16.02% 15.17% 17.21% 16.58% 2.91% 42.57% 

Building Permits 4 Austin Home Sales 5 

Federal, 

State and Dollar Average Number of 

Year Municipal Taxable Total Volume Sale Price Homes Sold 

$ $ $ $ $ 

2002 38,727,017 1,261,868,130 1,300,595,147 3,695,947,381 197,500 18,716 

2003 17,084,652 1,189,489,091 1,206,573,743 3,899,018,519 197,000 19,793 

2004 20,533,975 1,280,385,298 1,300,919,273 4,487,464,528 198,900 22,567 

2005 40,484,950 1,405,871,887 1,446,356,837 5,660,934,916 210,400 26,905 

2006 16,526,040 2,353,171,746 2,369,697,786 6,961,725,607 229,900 30,284 

2007 14,272,851 2,529,648,915 2,543,921,766 6,910,296,291 246,400 28,046 

2008 4,099,000 1,468,699,801 1,472,798,801 5,469,588,055 243,800 22,436 

2009 6,988,999 834,498,480 841,487,479 4,630,238,843 236,225 19,511 

2010 4,252,978 1,413,989,503 1,418,242,481 4,905,945,574 246,900 19,870 

2011 2,812,350 745,909,589 748,721,939 5,335,896,252 251,600 21,204 

2002-2011 

Change -92.74% -40.89% -42.43% 44.37% 27.39% 13.29% 

1. Source -City Demographer, City of Austin, Neighborhood Planning and Zoning Dept. in the City of Austin Comprehensive Annual 

Financial Report for Year ended September 30, 2011 

2. Source - Austin Energy 

3. Source - Texas Gas Service 

4. Source -City of Austin Planning & Development Review Department 

5. Source: Texas A&M University Real Estate Center, from the Austin Chamber of Commerce 


Table 137 


Employment by Industry in the Austin Metropolitan Statistical Area 1 

Industry Classification 

Number 

% of 

Total 

Number 

% of 

Total 

Number 

% of 

Total 

Number 

% of 

Total 

Manufacturing 51,100 6.33 84,000 12.30 48,200 12.20 31,014 12.80 

Government 169,900 21.06 137,100 20.10 112,700 28.50 78,263 32.30 

Trade, Transportation & Utilities 2 139,700 17.32 116,000 17.00 60,400 15.30 59,121 24.40 

Services and Miscellaneous 361,600 44.81 267,100 39.10 136,100 34.40 44,826 18.50 

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 45,000 5.58 35,400 5.20 24,700 6.20 14,296 5.90 

Contract Construction 3 35,550 4.41 26,500 3.90 7,400 1.90 14,053 5.80 

Natural Resources and Mining 3 3,950 0.49 16,200 2.40 6,200 1.60 727 0.30 

Totals 806,800 100.00 682,300 100.0 395,700 100.0 242,300 100.0 

1 Austin-Round Rock MSA includes Travis, Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays and Williamson counties. 

2 Trade, transportation and utilities have been reported together since 2003; reported numbers from 1990 have been 

adjusted. 

3 2011 figures for Contract Construction and Natural Resources and Mining are estimates provided by TWC based on 

a reported combined total. 

Source: Texas Workforce Commission 

Employer 

Table 138 


Top Ten Employers in Austin 

Product or Service 

Number of 

Employees 4 

% of 

Total 5 

State Government 

The University of Texas at Austin 

Dell Computer Corporation 



Seton Healthcare Network 

Federal Government 

HEB 

St. David's Healthcare Partnership 

IBM Corporation 

Government 

Education 

Computers 

Government 

Education 

Healthcare 

Government 

Grocer Retail/Distribution 

Healthcare 

Computers 

37,818 4.69 

22,956 2.85 

14,000 1.74 

11,997 1.49 

11,736 1.36 

11,601 1.45 

11,000 1.27 

10,263 1.44 

7,100 0.77 

6,239 0.88 

144,710 17.94 


September 

2012 468

Percent 

Table 139 


Urban and National Comparison of Unemployment Rate 2008-2012 

Unemployment Rate Comparison 

11.0 

10.0 

9.0 

8.0 

7.0 

6.0 

5.0 

4.0 

3.0 

2.0 

1.0 

0.0 

Arlington 


Dallas 

Fort 

Worth 

Harris 

County 

Houston 

San 

Antonio 

United 

States 

City/County 

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 

City 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

Austin 3.6 6.0 6.5 6.3 5.5 

Arlington 4.0 6.6 7.8 7.6 6.5 

Dallas 4.8 7.7 8.9 8.6 7.6 

Fort Worth 4.6 7.3 8.4 8.4 7.1 

Harris County 4.2 6.7 8.6 8.3 7.1 

Houston 4.2 6.5 8.2 8.0 7.1 

San Antonio 3.9 5.9 6.8 7.0 6.6 

United States 5.2 9.0 10.2 9.2 8.4 

Source: Texas Workforce Commission Labor Market Information Data. Figures are for March 

of each year represented. 


September 

2012 469



September 

2012 470

Glossary 

This glossary contains definitions of terms used in this guide and such additional terms as seem 

necessary to common understanding concerning financial accounting procedure for the school district. 

Several terms which are not primarily financial accounting terms, have been included because of their 

significance for school financial accounting. 

AAPSA. Austin Association of Public School Administrators 

ACADEMICALLY ACCEPTABLE. State recognition given to schools meeting each standard: 

Reading/ELA –50%, Writing-50%, Social Studies-50%, Mathematics-35%, Science-25% or meets 

required improvement. 

ACADEMICALLY EXEMPLARY. State recognition given to school that meets 90% standard for each 

subject. 

ACADEMICALLY RECOGNIZED. State recognition given to schools that have a passing rate of at least 

70% for each subject or meets 65% floor and required improvement. 

ACADEMICALLY UNACCEPTABLE. State recognition given to schools meeting each standard: 

Reading/ELA –50%, Writing-50%, Social Studies-50%, Mathematics-35%, Science-25% or meets 

required improvement. 

ACC. Austin Community College 

ACCELERATED EDUCATION PROGRAM. This term is used to record costs incurred to use 

instructional strategies to provide services in addition to those provided at the basic level of instruction, 

thereby increasing the amount and quality of instructional time for students in such at-risk situation. 

ACCESS. Austin Community Collaboration to Enhance Student Success funded by the Safe School 

Healthy Student Grant. 

ACES. Alternative Center for Elementary Students 

ACCOUNT. A descriptive heading under which are recorded financial transactions that are similar in 

terms of a given frame of reference, such as fund, function, or object. 

ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING. A method of accounting that recognizes the financial effect of 

transactions, events, and interfund activities when they occur, regardless of the timing of related cash 

flows. 

ADA. Students in ‘Average Daily Attendance’. 

ADMINISTRATION. Those activities which have as their purpose the general regulation, direction, and 

control of the affairs of the local education agency that are system-wide and not confined to one school, 

subject, or narrow phase of school activity. 

ADVANCE. Access Decide Visit Apply Now for Your College Education 

AEA. Alternative Education Accountability 

AEC. Alternative Education Campuses 


September 

2012 471

Glossary 

AEGBP. Austin Energy’s Green Building Program 

AEIS. Academic Excellence Indicator System 

AISD. Austin Independent School District 

ALC. Alternative Learning Center 

AIMS. Austin Instructional Management System 

ALLOCATION. A part of a lump sum appropriation, which is designated for expenditure by specific 

organization units and/or for special purposes, activities, or objects. 

AMENDED BUDGET. Adopted budget plus/minus budget revisions. 

AP. Advance Placement 

APGs. Advanced Planning Guides 

APIE. Austin Partners In Education 

APPRAISE. To make an estimate of value, particularly of the value of property. If the property is valued 

for purposes of taxation, the less-inclusive term “assess is substituted for the above term. 

APPROPRIATION ACCOUNT. A budgetary account set up to record specific authorization to spend. 

The account is credited with original and any supplemental appropriations and is charged with 

expenditures and encumbrances. 

ARD. Admission, Review and Dismissal 

ARRA. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

ASSESSED VALUATION. A valuation set upon real estate or other property by a government as a basis 

for levying taxes. 

AU. Academically Unacceptable Campuses 

AVID. Advanced Via Individual Determination 

AYP. Adequate Yearly Progress 

BASIC EDUCATION PROGRAM. This term is used to identify cost for expenditure function 11 

(instruction) and other expenditure functions for which operational costs can be specifically identified 

with the regular instructional program. 

BEST. Program promoting Belief in Our Students, Effort Creates Ability, Supporting Families and 

Targeting College. 


September 

2012 472

Glossary 

BILINGUAL/ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE PROGRAM. This term is used to record cost 

incurred to evaluate, place and provide education and/or other services that are intended to make the 

students proficient in the English language, primary language literacy, composition and academic 

language related to required courses. 

BOARD OF EDUCATION. The elected or appointed body, which has been created according to state 

law and vested with responsibilities for education activities in a given geographic area. 

BOND. A written promise to pay a specified sum of money, called the face value, at a fixed time in the 

future, called the date of maturity, and carrying interest at a fixed rate, usually payable periodically. 

BONDED DEBT. The part of the school district debt, which is covered by outstanding bonds of the 

district. Sometimes called “Funded Debt or Bonded Indebtedness”. 

BONDS AUTHORIZED AND UNISSUED. Bonds, which have been legally authorized but not, issued, 

and which can be issued and sold without further authorization. 

BONDS ISSUED. Bonds sold. 

BUDGET. A plan of financial operation embodying an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given 

period or purpose and the proposed means of financing them. 

BUDGET/TASK FORCE. Members appointed by the Superintendent who meet during the budget 

development process to review and comment on the proposed budget and its priorities. 

BUDGETARY ACCOUNTS. Special accounts used to achieve budgetary integration, but not reported in 

the general-purpose external statements. The most common budgetary accounts are estimated 

revenues, appropriations, budgetary fund balance and encumbrances. 

CAC. Carruth Administration Center 

CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND. Fund type used to account for financial resources to be used for the 

acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by proprietary funds and 

trust funds). 

CAPITAL OUTLAY. Expenditures, which result in the acquisition of or addition to, fixed assets. 

CATE. Career and Technology Education 

CATCH. Coordinated Approach to Child Health 

CBDNA. College Band Directors National Association 

CCPP. College and Career Preparatory Program 

CCRS. Texas College and Readiness Standards 


September 

2012 473

Glossary 

CHAPTER 41 DISTRICT. When property wealth exceeds $319,500 per WADA, forcing a school district 

to send part of its local tax revenue to the state. 

CIP. Continuous Improvement Plan 

COCURRICULAR ACTIVITIES. Direct and personal services for public school pupil, such as 

interscholastic athletics, entertainments, publications, clubs, band, and orchestra that are managed or 

operated by the student body under the guidance and direction of an adult, and are not part of the 

regular instruction program. 

COIN. A web program for students to create an individual college and career plan. 

COMMUNITY SERVICES. Those services provided for the community as a whole or some segment of 

the community and which are not restricted to the public schools or adult education programs. 

CONTRACTED SERVICES. Labor, material and other costs for services rendered by personnel who are 

not on the payroll of the school district. 

CRT. Criterion-Referenced Test 

CTE. Career and Technology Education 

CURRENT. Refers to the fiscal year in progress. 

CURRENT BUDGET. The annual budget prepared for and effective during the present fiscal year. 

CURRENT YEAR’S TAX LEVY. Taxes levied for the current fiscal period. 

DAC. District Advisory Council 

DAEP. District Alternative Education Program 

DEBT. An obligation resulting from the borrowing of money or from the purchase of goods and services. 

DEBT SERVICE FUND. Governmental fund type used to account for the accumulation of resources for, 

and the payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. 

DEFICIT. The excess of the obligations of a fund over the fund’s resources. 

DELINQUENT TAXES. Taxes remaining unpaid on and after the date on which they become delinquent. 

DPE. Department of Program Evaluation 

EDUCATION AUSTIN. Teacher’s Union Organization for Austin teachers. 

EL. Executive Limitations 

ELA . English Language Arts 


September 

2012 474

Glossary 

ELDA. English Language Development Academy 

ELEVAR. English Language Learner Versed in Academic Rigor 

ELLs. English Language Learners 

ELLA. The English Language and Literacy Academy 

ELPS. English Language Proficiency Standards 

EMT. Emergency Medical Technician 

ENCUMBRANCES. Encumbrance accounting under which purchase orders, contracts and other 

commitments are recorded in order to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation is used in all 

Governmental Fund types. Since appropriations lapse at year-end, outstanding encumbrances are 

reappropriated in the subsequent fiscal year’s budget to provide for the liquidation of the prior 

commitments. 

ENTERPRISE FUND. Proprietary fund type used to report an activity for which a fee is charge to 

external users for good or services. 

EQUIPMENT. Those moveable items used for school operation that are of a non-expendable and 

mechanical nature that have a unit cost of > $5000 including telephone and communication systems, 

mainframe and minicomputers, high capacity copiers and printing machines. 

ESL. English Second Language 

EXEMPLARY. State recognition given to school that meets 90% standard for each subject. 

EXPENDITURES PER STUDENT. Current expenditures for a given period of time divided by a pupil unit 

of measure (total number of students enrolled). 

FAR. Financial Accountability System Resource Guide 

FASB. Financial Accounting Standards Board 

FIDUCIARY FUNDS. Funds used to report assets held in a trustee or agency capacity for others and 

which therefore cannot be used to support the government’s own programs. The fiduciary fund category 

at AISD includes agency funds. 

FIRST. Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas 

FISCAL YEAR. A twelve-month period of time to which the annual budget applies and at the end of 

which the district determines its financial position and the results of its operations; for example, 

September 1 through August 31. 

FIXED ASSETS. Land, buildings and equipment which the district intends to hold or continue to use over 

a long period of time 


September 

2012 475

Glossary 

FOOD SERVICE SUMMER FEEDING PROGRAM FUND. 

Accounts for funds received from the Department of Human Services that are awarded for meals 

provided to the community based on the average number of daily participants. This fund should be used 

regardless of whether a school district’s National School Breakfast and Lunch Program is accounted for 

in the General Fund (101), Special Revenue Funds (240 and 242), or an Enterprise Fund (701). 

FTF. First Things First 

FUNCTION. As applied to expenditures, this term has reference to an activity or service aimed at 

accomplishing a certain purpose or end; for example, Instruction, Instructional Administration, Plant 

Maintenance and Operations. 

FUND. A sum of money or other resources set aside for specific activities of a school district. The fund 

accounts constitute a complete entity and all of the financial transactions for the particular fund are 

recorded therein. 

FUND BALANCE. The difference between assets and liabilities reported in a governmental fund. 

GAAP. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles 

GAATN. Greater Austin Area Telecommunications Network 

GASB. Governmental Accounting Standard Board 

GEAR UP. Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs 

GED. General Education Development, usually used in term of GED tests to measure the outcome of a 

high school education. 

GENERAL FUND. The general fund is one of five governmental fund types and typically serves as the 

chief operating fund of a government. The general fund is used to account for all financial resources 

except those required to be accounted for in another fund. 

GFOA. Government Finance Officers Association 

GIFTED & TALENTED PROGRAM. This term is used to identify cost for expenditure function 11 and 

other applicable expenditure functions for academic programs established for students who have been 

identified as functioning at a higher intellectual plane and/or possessing talents exceeding those 

normally expended from the majority of the student population. 

GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS. Funds generally used to account for tax-supported activities. There are 

different types of governmental funds: the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, 

capital project funds, and permanent funds. 

GPA. Gold Performance Acknowledgements 


September 

2012 476

Glossary 

GRANT. A contribution, either money or material goods, made by one governmental unit to another unit 

and for which the contributing unit expects no repayment. Grants may be for specific or general 

purposes. 

HMO-HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION. A healthcare system that assumes or shares both the 

financial risk and the delivery risks associated with providing comprehensive medical services to a 

voluntarily enrolled population in a particular geographic area, usually in return for a fixed, prepaid fee. 

HR. Human Resources 

HVAC. Heating Ventilation Air Conditioning 

IACP. Individual Academic Career Plan 

IB. International Baccalaureate 

IDM. Identity Management and Security Infrastructure Enhancement System 

IEP. Individual Education Plan 

IHS. International High School 

INSTRUCTION. The activities dealing directly with the teaching of students or improving the quality of 

teaching. 

INTEREST. A fee charged a borrower for the use of money. 

INTEREST & SINKING (I & S). District income from local real and personal property taxes that is used 

for the Debt Service Fund. 

INVENTORY. Inventory is stated at cost using the first-in, first-out method. Inventory in the General 

Fund consists of expendable parts and supplies. The costs are recorded as expenditures at the time 

individual inventory items are distributed to the various user locations. 

IPGs. Instructional Planning Guides 

ISTE. The International Society for Technology Education 

ITBS. Iowa Test of Basic Skills 

ITED. Iowa Test of Educational Development 

IWC. International Welcome Center 

JJAEP. Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program 

LAT. Linguistically Accommodated Test 


September 

2012 477

Glossary 

LDC. Leadership Development Academy 

LEGAL DEBT MARGIN. The excess of the amount of debt legally authorized over the amount of debt 

outstanding. 

LEP. Limited English Proficient 

LEVY. To impose taxes or special assessments. 

LPAS. Language Proficiency Assessment System 

LST. Local Support Team 

MAC. Medicaid Administrative Claiming Program 

MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS (M&O). District income from local and personal property taxes that is 

used for the General Fund. 

MD&D. Management’s Discussion and Analysis 

MIS. Department of Management Information Systems 

MLEB. Middle Level Education Plan 

MODIFIED ACCRUAL BASIS OF ACCOUNTING. Basis of accounting used in conjunction with the 

current financial resources measurement focus that modifies the accrual basis of accounting in two 

important ways 1) revenues are not recognized until they are measurable and available, and 2) 

expenditures are recognized in the period in which governments in general normally liquidate the related 

liability rather than when that liability is first incurred (if earlier). 

MPGs. Magnet Planning Guides 

MSA. Metropolitan Statistical Area 

NCAA. National Collegiate Athletic Association 

NCEA. National Center for Educational Achievement 

NCLB. No Child Left Behind 

NETS. National Educational Technology Standards 

NEW POSITION REQUESTS. Non-existing personnel position that requested to be added for the next 

fiscal year. 

NI. Needs Improvements Campuses 

NMSQT. National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test 


September 

2012 478

Glossary 

NSLP. National School Lunch Program 

NSS. Network Systems and Support 

OBE. Office of Bilingual Education 

OBJECT. A term used in connection with the classification of expenditures. The article purchased or the 

service obtained, rather than the purpose for which the article or service was purchased or obtained. 

PAPA. Parenting and Parental Awareness 

PAYROLL. A list of individual employees entitled to pay, with the amounts due to each for personal 

services rendered. 

PBS. Positive Behavior Support 

PBMAS. Performance-Based Monitoring Analysis System 

PEIMS. Public Education Information Management System is a data collection system for all public 

school districts in Texas. 

PERSONNEL, INSTRUCTIONAL. Those who render services dealing directly with the instruction of 

pupils including classroom teachers, teacher’s aides, classroom assistants and graders. 

PERSONNEL, PROFESSIONAL. Teachers, principals, assistant principals, librarians, counselors, 

administrators, etc. that is not eligible for overtime pay. 

PERSONNEL, SUPPORT. Secretaries, clerks, teacher aides, custodian and campus monitors who are 

eligible for overtime pay. 

PET. Personal Identification Database Enrollment Tracking System 

PLANT MAINTENANCE. Those activities which are concerned with keeping the grounds, buildings, and 

other equipment at their original condition or completeness or efficiency, either through repairs or by 

replacements of property. 

POL. Principles of Learning 

PPCD. Programs for Children with Disabilities 

PREFERRED PROVIDER ORGANIZATION (PPO). A healthcare benefit arrangement designed to 

supply services at a discounted cost by providing incentives for members to use designated healthcare 

providers (who contract with the PPO at a discount), but which also provides coverage for services 

rendered by healthcare providers who are not part of the PPO network. 

PRELIMINARY TAX VALUES. Appraisal used to project the district’s revenue from property taxes before 

completion of the certified tax roll. 

PRIDE. Preparing Responsible Individuals Dedicated to Excellence 


September 

2012 479

Glossary 

PRINCIPAL OF BONDS. The face value of bonds. 

PROGRAM. The definition of an effort to accomplish a specific object or objectives consistent with funds 

or resources available. Budgets and actual revenue and expenditure records may be maintained per 

program. 

PROPRIETARY FUNDS. Funds that focus on the determination of operating income, changes in net 

assets (or cost recovery), financial position, and cash flows. There are two different types of proprietary 

funds: enterprise funds and internal service funds. 

PSAT. Pre-Scholastic Aptitude Test 

PTA. Parent Teacher Association 

QZAB. Qualified Zone Academic Bonds 

QTEL. Quality Teaching for English Learners 

READ 180. A reading intervention program with a computer software interactive compontent. 

RECOGNIZED. State recognition given to schools that have a passing rate of at least 70% for each 

subject or meets 65% floor and required improvement. 

REVENUE. The yield of taxes, tuition, interest earnings, and other monetary resources that the District 

collects and receives into the treasury for public use. For those revenues which are recorded on the 

accrual basis, this term designates additions to assets which (a) do not increase any liability; (b) do not 

represent the recovery of an expenditure; (c) do not represent contributions of fund capital in enterprise 

and internal service funds. The same definition applies to those cases where revenue are recorded on 

the modified accrual or cash basis, except that additions would be partially or entirely to cash. 

RESERVED FUND BALANCE. The portion of a governmental fund’s net assets that is not available for 

appropriation. 

ROTC. Army Reserve Officer Training Corp 

RtI. Response to Intervention 

SALARY. The total amount regularly paid or stipulated to be paid to an individual, before deductions, for 

personal services rendered while on the school district payroll. 

SAS. Statistical Analysis Software 

SASI. School Administrative Student Information 

SCHOOL, ELEMENTARY. A school classified as elementary by State and local practice and composed 

of grades kindergarten through fifth. 


September 

2012 480

Glossary 

SCHOOL, SECONDARY. A school comprised of students beginning with the next grade following the 

elementary school and ending with or below grade 12, including 6 th grade centers, middle schools, high 

schools and vocational or trade high schools. 

SCHOOL, PRINCIPAL. The administrative head of a school to who has been delegated the major 

responsibility for the coordination and supervision of the activities of the school. 

SDAA II. State Developed Alternative Assessment II 

SECAC. Special Education Citizen’s Advisory Committee 

SERIAL BONDS. A bond whose principal is to be repaid in periodic installments over the life of the 

issue. 

SHAC. School Health Advisory Council 

SHARS. School Health and Related Services 

SIOP. Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol 

SMART. Science Math and Reading Tutors 

SPAM. The term spam refers to unsolicited commercial e-mail. 

SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM. This term is used to identify cost for expenditure functions for which 

costs can be specifically identified with instruction and related services for those programs for 

handicapped children approved by the Texas Education Agency. 

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS. Account for certain revenues derived from the state and federal 

governments, which are required to finance particular activities. These funds provide enrichment 

programs, testing of pilot programs and enhance programs not provided by the general operating 

revenues. 

SPECIAL SCHOOL. A school that serves a specific, targeted student population. 

SREB. Southern Regional Education Board 

STATE AID FOR EDUCATION. Any grant made by a State government for the support of education. 

SUPPLY. A material item of an expendable nature that is consumed, worn out, or deteriorated in use. 

T-STEM. Texas Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. 

TAAS (TEXAS ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC SKILLS). Students in Texas public schools in grades 3-8 

and 10 take this criterion-referenced test during the spring semester of each school year. All portions of 

the exam must be passed prior to graduation. 

TAC. Texas Administrative Code 


September 

2012 481

Glossary 

TAKS (TEXAS ASSESSMENT OF KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS). Students in Texas public schools in 

grades 3-8 and 10 take this criterion-referenced test during the spring semester of each school year. All 

portions of the exam must be passed prior to graduation. 

TAX RATE. Total tax rate is set by the Board of Trustees and is made up of two components: 

maintenance and operating and debt service rates. It is the amount levied for each $100 of assessed 

valuation. 

TAXES. Compulsory charges levied by a governmental unit for the purpose of financing services 

performed for the common benefit. 

TCAD. Travis County Appraisal District 

TEA. Texas Education Agency 

TEC. Texas Education Code 

TELPAS. Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System 

TEKS. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills 

TLA. Technology Literacy Assessments 

TMEA. Texas Music Educators Association 

TREx. Texas Record Exchange 

TRS. Teacher Retirement System of Texas 

TPRI. Texas Primary Reading Inventory 

UCLA. University of California, Los Angeles 

USDE. United States Department of Education 

UIL. University Interscholastic League 

USDA. United States Department of Agriculture 

UNDESIGNATED FUND BALANCE. The difference between the unreserved fund balance and the 

designated unreserved fund balance. This portion of the fund balance is usually available to finance 

monthly operating expenditures. 

UNRESERVED DESIGNATED FUND BALANCE. The portion of the fund balance identified by 

management to reflect tentative plans or commitments of government resources. 

VCT. Vinyl Composition Tile 

VOC. Volatile Organic Compounds 


September 

2012 482

Glossary 

VOCATIONAL PROGRAM. This term is used to identify costs for expenditure 11 and other expenditure 

functions for which costs can be specifically identified with those vocational education programs 

approved by the Texas Education Agency. 

WADA. Weighted Average Daily Attendance, an adjusted student count that compensates for student 

and district characteristics as defined by statute. Students with special education needs, for example, 

are ‘weighted’ by a factor ranging from 1.1 to 5.0 times the ‘regular’ program weight in order to fund their 

special needs. 

WOW. Working Out for Wellness 


September 

2012 483



OFFICIAL BUDGET 

Read and download a copy of the FY2013 Official Budget at 

www.austinisd.org/publications 

AUSTIN Independent School District

FY2013 Official Budget - Austin ISD

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?