In fiscal year 2013, Yarnell Elementary School District’s student AIMS scores were similar to or higher than peer districts’ averages, and the District’s efficiency in noninstructional areas was mixed, with some costs higher and some lower than peer districts’. The District’s administrative costs per pupil were higher than peer districts’, on average, but only because it had fewer students. The District’s plant operations costs were lower in part because it spent less on salaries and benefits than peer districts, but a poorly maintained facility on district property raises health and safety concerns and could expose the District to potential liability. Further, the District had high food service program costs, and it had to subsidize over one-half of its program’s costs with monies that otherwise potentially could have been spent in the classroom. Lastly, the District’s transportation costs were higher primarily because it had higher salary and benefit costs and higher fuel costs than the peer districts averaged. Additionally, the District did not collect all revenue it was due from a neighboring school district, did not ensure that bus driver certification and bus preventative maintenance requirements were met, and misreported student transportation information for state funding purposes.