|
|
|
Litchfield Elementary School
District (August 2006) |
| |
| |
At $560 per pupil, Litchfield
Elementary’s fiscal year 2005 administrative costs were similar to the
comparable districts’. However, the District inappropriately paid to
administrative and classified staff performance-based bonuses totaling about
$327,000 that were not properly included in fiscal year 2005 employment
contracts. The food service program was self-sufficient and operated efficiently
with a cost per meal of $1.78, 35 cents lower than the comparable districts’
average. The District achieved this low cost per meal by using a significant
amount of federal food commodities and monitoring the program’s performance
benchmarks. Despite having efficient routes and average costs, the District
subsidized its transportation program by $264,000, mostly due to growth. Plant
costs were similar to comparable districts’. The District spent its Proposition
301 monies for purposes authorized under statute. Eligible employees each
received a base pay increase of $800 and an average performance pay increase of
$1,853. The District’s fiscal year 2005 classroom dollars percentage of 57.2
percent was 1.2 percentage points below the state average, and its total
per-pupil spending was lower than state and national averages. The District
spent less federal and state program monies and allocated more discretionary
monies for capital purposes, such as classroom equipment, than the comparable
districts did.
|
|
|