SECTION 4: PUBLIC EDUCATION

This section tabulates the level of state and local elementary and secondary education spending, and higher education spending, relative to personal income, and number of state and local public employees in these categories relative to population. Data is presented for in different regions of New York State, the national average, New Jersey, and other states. The 1997 census of governments is the primary source of information, but other data sources are used for comparison.

Education is the most extensive service that state and local governments provide. In March 1997, higher education accounted for one-third of U.S. state government employment. Elementary and secondary schools and community colleges accounted for 56 percent of U.S. local government employment. In fiscal 1997, education accounted for $419 billion of the $1,461 trillion spent by state and local governments in the United States (29 percent), far more than any other category of service. Health, welfare, and social services were next at $318 billion, but $124 billion of that was funded by aid from the federal government, leaving just $194 billion to be funded by state and local taxes. The federal government only provided $36 billion in education aid, leaving $273 billion to be funded at the state and local level.

Chart 4.1: State and Local Direct Expenditures: Elementary and Secondary Schools

Sources: Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

In New York State, spending on elementary and secondary schools was above the national average.

In fiscal 1997, New York State’s local governments spent the equivalent of 5.1 percent of its residents’ personal income on public elementary and secondary schools. That was 13.1 percent higher than the national average of 4.5 percent of income. New York’s public school spending was slightly higher than New Jersey and Washington State (4.8 percent), and substantially higher than California (4.0), Illinois (3.9), and North Carolina (4.1). It was at the same level, relative to income, as Texas and Minnesota. The highest spending state, at 7.8 percent of income, was Alaska, a place where teachers have to be flown to spend months with individual children in the bush. The lowest was Hawaii, at 3.1 percent of income, a state where income is inflated by childless retirees.

New York State’s spending on public elementary and secondary schools equaled 5.9 percent of its residents’ income in fiscal 1972, when much of the large baby boom generation was still in school. That was 14 percent more than the national average of 5.2 percent. Spending has fallen as a share of income in most states – by 13.5 percent in New York, 3.3 percent in New Jersey, 12.8 percent in Washington State, 14.3 percent in Illinois, 15.4 percent in North Carolina, and 21.4 percent in California. The steepest decline relative to income, 31 percent, was in Hawaii. On the other hand, public school spending increased as a share of income in Wisconsin, Maine, Ohio, Rhode Island, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama, and West Virginia.

For a spreadsheet with data for all 50 states, click here.

Chart 4.2: Elementary and Secondary School Spending

Sources: 1997 Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

New York City’s public school spending was low, but spending in other parts of New York State was high.

If New York City were a separate state, its state and local taxes as a share of income would have been the second highest behind Alaska, but its public elementary and secondary school spending would have been the second lowest behind Hawaii. Special circumstances explain the level of taxes and spending in those unusual states, but not in the City of New York. At 3.7 percent of its residents’ income, New York City’s spending on public schools was 18 percent below the national average of 4.5 percent

Many of the counties containing other major U.S. cities were also below average in education spending as a share of income, even counties that are co-terminus with a central city boundary (or nearly so) and incomes are low. Low school spending counties include Washington D.C. (3.2 percent of its residents income), Philadelphia (3.9), Suffolk County MA – Boston (3.2), San Francisco (1.7), Cook County – Chicago (3.7), Fulton County – Atlanta (3.4), Los Angeles County (4.0), Dallas County (3.5), and Harris County (Houston) 3.7).

New York’s Downstate Suburbs, meanwhile, spent 5.25 percent of their residents’ personal income on public schools, 16 percent more than the national average and 8.9 percent more than in New Jersey. This is despite the generally high incomes in these suburbs. Westchester County, at 4.1 percent of income, was below the national average, and thus an exception in this group. Interestingly, in Santa Clara County in California’s Silicon Valley, soaring average income pushed public school expenditures down to 2.7 percent of income. It also inflated the cost of living, and soaring housing prices have made it extremely difficult for school districts in the county to attract teachers, even with nominally (but not relatively) high salaries.

In Upstate New York, public school spending is high as a share of income. Public school spending in the Upstate Metros, at 6.0 percent if their residents’ incomes, was 33 percent above the national average in Fiscal 1997. Among states, only Alaska and Wyoming were higher. Public school spending in the Rest of New York State, at 8.0 percent of income, was nearly double the national average, and higher even than in Alaska. In some of New York’s poorer counties, the public schools account for over ten percent of the income of county residents. State mandates, such as rules requiring school bus service even in areas where most residents have cars, push up non-instructional spending in rural upstate areas, but provide a source of income for some residents.

For a spreadsheet with data for all New York counties, click here.

Chart 4.3: Elementary and Secondary School Spending By Source Of Funds

Sources: 1997 Census of Governments Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

Both the federal and state education aid NYC receives, and the local tax dollars the City spends on education, were low relative to other areas of the state and the national average.

According to the 1997 Census of Governments, the federal and state education aid New York City received was equivalent to 2.06 percent of its residents’ personal income, 19 percent below the national average of 2.55. (The census of governments does not allow federal and state aid to be separated, because federal aid is recorded as paid to the state, then passed on to local governments as state aid). New York City’s spending on public schools from local revenue sources equaled 1.63 percent of its residents’ income, 14 percent below the national average of 1.90. The high burden of Medicaid and social services in the City, discussed in Section 3, limits its ability to spend its own tax revenues on its public schools.

The federal and state education aid the Downstate Suburbs received was equivalent to 1.49 percent of its residents’ personal income, 28 percent below the amount received by New York City. Fiscal 1997, however, was before the widespread implementation of New York State’s STAR program, a new form of school aid designed to provide additional money for districts with high property values, such as the Downstate Suburbs and affluent suburbs upstate. With a lower Medicaid and social services burden, the Downstate Suburbs spent 3.76 percent of their residents personal income on local funding for public schools, more than double the level in New York City and about double the national average.

The federal and state education aid the Upstate Metros received was equivalent to 3.03 percent of its residents’ personal income, 47 percent more than the amount received by New York City and 19 percent above the national average. Since spending was so high, however, the amount funded by local revenues in these areas – equal to 2.97 percent of the income of area residents – was also high. It was 56 percent higher than the national average, and 82 percent higher than in New York City. Similarly, the federal and state education aid the Rest of New York State received was equivalent to 4.95 percent of its residents’ personal income, more than total school spending as a share of income in the nation as a whole. Since spending was so high, however, the amount funded by local revenues, at 3.03 percent of income, was also high. Like New York City, the Rest of New York State has a high Medicaid and social services burden relative to income. With locally-funded school expenditures also high, these areas have high taxes despite the absence, in many cases, of public water, public sewer, professional fire protection, taxpayer funded solid waste collection, etc.

To return to the spreadsheet with county-level public school spending, click here.

Chart 4.4: Elementary and Secondary School Spending By Source Of Funds: Alternative Data Sources

Sources: Within NY State: Website of the NY State Education Department (Board of Regents). State data: National Education Association as cited in the Statistical Abstract of the United States. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis.

According to an alternative data source, low state aid was the primary cause of low NYC school spending.

To provide additional information and a comparison, the author tabulated the amount and source of funding for public schools in fiscal 1997 using alternative sources. The administrative records of the New York State Education Department (Board of Regents) were used for counties within New York State, and the Statistical Abstract of the United States was used for the 50 states and the national average. For a spreadsheet of this data, click here.

This data confirms that New York City’s total public schools revenue, equal to 3.8 percent of the income of New York City residents, was 23 percent below the national average of 4.9 percent. It was lower than in any state except (barely) Tennessee, the state with the nation’s lowest state and local taxes. New York City’s federal school aid revenues, at 0.3 percent of its residents income, were average. It’s local school funding, at 1.9 percent of income, was only slightly below the national average, at 2.0 percent of income. Thus, New York City’s low public school spending was primarily the result of low state aid. New York City’s state education aid was equivalent to 1.6 percent of its residents’ income, 27 percent below the national average of 2.3 percent.

The data shows that total public school revenues in the Downstate Suburbs, at 5.5 percent of income, were 12 percent higher than the national average and 9 percent higher than in New Jersey. Federal aid, at 0.1 percent of income, was one-third the national average, since this is primarily distributed to areas with many poor children. State aid, at 1.3 percent of income, was 20 percent lower than in New York City, but this was before the widespread implementation of the STAR program. Local funding for public schools in the Downstate Suburbs, at 4.1 percent of the income of area residents, was very high – more than double the national average.

This data shows that total public school revenues equaled 6.2 percent of the incomes of area residents in the Upstate Metros, and 8.1 percent in the Rest of New York State, about the same level as reported by the Census of Governments. The data confirms that Upstate areas received more state aid, as a share of their residents’ personal income, but still contributed substantial local funding, due to the high rate of spending overall. Federal aid as a share of income was below average in the Upstate Metros, and just average in the Rest of New York State, even though both were relatively poor areas in Fiscal 1997.

Chart 4.5: State and Local Higher Education Expenditures
Local Government: 1997

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

New York City’s spending on community colleges was low; spending was high elsewhere in the state.

In general, local government higher education institutions are community colleges. Spending on local government higher education in New York City, at 0.16 percent of the income of city residents, was 33 percent below the national average of 0.24 percent. The Downstate Suburbs (0.32 percent of income), the Upstate Metros (0.42) and the Rest of New York State (0.51) were well above the national average – more than double in the case of the Rest of New York State. New Jersey was about average. In many states, community colleges have become key resources for ongoing, high level vocational and technical training. In New York City, the emphasis has been on placing as many students as possible in four-year colleges to allow them to pursue professional careers. According to the NYC Board of Education, 87 percent of 1997 high school graduates planned to go on to higher education, but less than half of the city’s public high school students had graduated after four years. To return to the spreadsheet of local government education data, click here.

State Government

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

New York State’s spending on public colleges and universities was also low.

New York State’s direct spending on higher education, generally for four year colleges, equaled 0.7 percent of the income of state residents in Fiscal 1997. That was 43 percent below the national average of 1.2 percent of income. Like New Jersey, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, New York’s college students are more likely to attend private colleges and universities than are students in other states. Many counties in Upstate New York did not report local government higher education expenditures, despite having two-year colleges. Presumably, community colleges in those counties are included in the state spending tabulated above. To return to the spreadsheet with state and local education spending for all 50 states, click here.

Chart 4.6: State and Local Higher Education Charges

Source: Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

New York State, and some of its local governments, covered a below-average share of their higher education spending through charges for services.

For New York State colleges, and community colleges in the Downstate Suburbs, charges (ie. tuition, room and board, etc.) covered a below average share of total spending. Charges covered 35 percent of the State of New York’s higher education expenditures, compared with a national average of 46 percent, and 49 percent in New Jersey. For local government higher education (ie. community colleges,) charges covered 26 percent of spending in the Downstate Suburbs, compared with a national average of 28 percent. Nassau County, where charges covered only 19 percent of total expenses, brought the Downstate Suburban average down. Charges covered 33 percent of local government higher education expenditures in New York City, 37 percent in the Upstate Metros, and 41 percent in the Rest of New York State. In New Jersey, charges covered 42 percent of spending on local government higher education.

To return to the spreadsheet of higher education by county, click here.

Chart 4.7: State and Local Education Spending Over Time

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Income: Bureau of Economic Analysis. See introduction for details.

Both in New York State and the United States, education spending was lower in FY 1997 than in the early 1970s.

Both in New York State and the United States, public elementary and secondary school expenditures fell as a share of income as the large “baby boom” generation left school, and the smaller “baby bust” generation took its place. In New York State, spending fell from 5.9 percent of income in Fiscal 1972 to a low of 4.5 percent of income in Fiscal 1982. In the United States, spending fell from 5.2 percent of income in Fiscal 1972 to a low of 4.0 percent of income in Fiscal 1985. As the children of the baby boomers (ie. the baby boom echo) entered school, however, public school spending rose to 5.4 percent of income in New York State, and 4.5 percent of income in the United States, in Fiscal 1995. From 1995 to 1997, public school spending as a share of income fell to 5.1 percent in New York State, while the national average was stable. One legacy of public school cutbacks in the cities in the 1970s, and in the suburbs in the 1980s, is closed, obsolete, and poorly maintained school buildings. This has led to school building shortage and quality problems.

Public higher education expenditures also fell as the baby boomers left school. In New York State, they fell from 1.5 percent of income in Fiscal 1972 to 1.1 percent of income in fiscal 1985 before leveling off. This 27 percent drop exceeded the 22 percent drop in elementary and secondary school expenditures in New York State during that time. Like its public school buildings, many of New York’s public colleges, built in the 1960s, have aged. In the United States, public higher education expenditures fell by just 11 percent as a share of income from Fiscal 1972 (1.8 percent) to Fiscal 1985 (1.6 percent), and not at all since them. With above average spending on elementary and secondary schools, and below average spending on higher education, New York’s statewide total education spending, as a share of income, was just about average in Fiscal 1997. For a spreadsheet of this data, click here.

Chart 4.8: NYC and U.S. Direct Expenditures on Education

Sources: 1997 Census of Governments, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Income: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis Annual New York City data calculated by the author, using expenditure data from the Annual Report of the New York City Comptroller (the same source the Census Bureau uses to tabulated New York City data for the Census of Governments) and income data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

New York City’s education spending has been below average since at least the early 1980s, but approached the national average in the late 1990s.

New York City’s expenditures on education, as a share of its residents’ income, have remained below the national local government average year in and year out. From 1997 to 1999, however, the city’s public school expenditures rose as a share of income even as the income earned by city residents also rose. Since national data takes so long to collect and release, it remains to be seen if, for at least one year, the city’s public school expenditures matched then national average. Two legacies of past spending priorities – inadequate and deteriorated school buildings and high pensions for those teachers about to retire, however, will continue to affect future NYC schoolchildren even if spending is now raised.

New York City’s education expenditures were below average when Ed Koch was Mayor, Mario Cuomo was Governor, Ronald Reagan was President, and the Board of Estimate was the chief governing body of the city. They were below average when David Dinkins was Mayor, Cuomo was still Governor, George Bush was President, and the City Council was the chief governing body of the city. After the Republicans took Congress, Bill Clinton took the White House, George Pataki became Governor, and Rudolph Giuliani became Mayor, the city’s education spending remained below average.

Throughout this period, the New York State legislature has been run by essentially the same group of people.

Chart 4.9: March 1997 Employment: Public Elementary and Secondary Schools

Sources: 1997 Census of Governments. Population: 2000 Census of Population, unadjusted data.

Like spending, New York City’s public school employment was low, while public school employment in the rest of the state was high.

New York City’s public school spending was low in Fiscal 1997, in part, because its public school staffing, at 1,655 employees per 100,000 residents, was 15 percent below the national average (1,947). Its employment to population ratio was far below that of the Downstate Suburbs (2,145) or the Upstate Metros (2,375), both of which are well above the national average. High public school spending in the Rest of New York State is caused, in part, by the understandable need to provide services despite low incomes. This data, however, shows that very high education employment – at 2,599 per 100,000 residents – also played a role. The ratio of public elementary and secondary school employment to population was 11 percent above the national average in the Downstate Suburbs, 22 percent above average in the Upstate Metros, and 33 percent above average in the Rest of New York State. New Jersey, as usual, was just about average, in this case one percent below.

Many of these differences in overall employment result from differences in non-instructional employment (ie. administration, school cafeteria, building maintenance, school bus employees). New York City’s public school instructional employment, 1,254 per 100,000 residents, was only 8 percent below the national average of 1,363, while its non-instructional employment, 402 per 100,000 residents, was 31 percent below the national average of 584. This corresponds with other data that shows that the overall student-teacher ratio in the city’s public schools, while higher than in the rest of the state, is not much higher than the national average. Large classes in the general population are balanced by small special education classes, and extensive out of class assignments. Note that instructional employees primarily consist of, but are not limited to, classroom teachers.

The Downstate Suburbs were 8.6 percent above the national average in instructional employment, and 13.9 percent above average in non-instructional. The Upstate Metros were 18.3 percent above the national average in instructional employment, and 30.5 percent above average in non-instructional. The Rest of New York State was 31.4 percent above the national average in instructional employment, and 38.3 percent above average in non-instructional. New Jersey was above average in instructional employment (though not as high as any region of New York State outside of New York City), and below average in non-instructional employment.

To return to the spreadsheet of employment data, click here.

Chart 4.10: March 1997 Payroll Per Employee
Private Sector and Public Schools vs. National Average

Source: Local government: 1997 Census of Governments, March 1997 payroll divided by full time equivalent employment. Private Sector: Bureau of Economic Analysis, 1997 annual private earnings by place of work divided by annual average private employment.

Public school instructional employees were paid more than private sector workers, relative to the national average, in every part of New York and New Jersey except New York City, where they were paid less.

As discussed in Section 2, New York City’s public school instructional employees are not only somewhat understaffed relative to the national average, they are also somewhat underpaid. Whereas the average private-sector worker in Downstate New York earned 29 percent more than the national average in 1997 (if the high-paid finance industries in Manhattan are excluded), the average New York City public school instructional employee earned only 11 percent more than the national average.

In contrast, instructional employees were highly paid, relative to their private-sector counterparts in the Downstate Suburbs (63 percent above the national average vs. 29 percent), the Upstate Metros (37 percent above vs. three percent below), the Rest of New York State (18 percent above vs. 17 percent below), and New Jersey (45 percent above vs. 25 percent above). Since the overall private sector wage level affects both the competition for talent in the labor market and the cost of living, New York City’s below average public school instructional wages relative to the private sector in large part explain its recruiting difficulties. The very high wages available in other parts of New York State and New Jersey make recruiting more difficult still.

Throughout New York and New Jersey, non-instructional public school employees were paid less relative to other places. In New York City, the Downstate Suburbs, the Upstate Metros, and New Jersey, they were paid less than the national average relative to their private-sector counterparts. In the Rest of New York State they were paid somewhat more, but only because private sector wages were so low. To return to the employment and payroll spreadsheet, click here.

Chart 4.11: Public Employment In Higher Education
Local Government: 1997

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Population: 2000 Census of Population, unadjusted data.

New York City’s local government higher education employment was lower than other parts of the state.

New York City’s employment in local government higher education, per 100,000 city residents, was below the national average, while employment in other parts of New York State was above the national average. This was primarily due to differences in non-instructional staff. Instructional staff per 100,000 residents was at about the national average (46) in New York City (48); above average in the Downstate Suburbs (74), the Upstate Metros (95), and New Jersey (55), and below average in the Rest of New York State (24). Non-instructional staff per 100,000 residents was below the national average (56) in New York City (43) and the Downstate Suburbs (50) and above average in the Upstate Metros (86), the Rest of New York State (76) and New Jersey (78). To return to the local government employment spreadsheet, click here.

State Government

Source: 1997 Census of Governments. Population: 2000 Census of Population, unadjusted data.

The State of New York’s higher education employment was below the national average.

New York’s non-instructional higher education employment per 100,000 residents was far below the national average at the state level, perhaps because so many of its students commute to rather than live-at school (many non-instructional employees provide food and housing for on-campus students). New York’s instructional employment was also low, because the state’s students are more likely to attend private colleges. Instructional and non-instructional employment were also below average in New Jersey. To return to the state government employment spreadsheet, click here.

Chart 4.12: March 1997 Payroll Per Employee
Private Sector and Local Government Higher Education, vs. National Average

State Government, March 1997 Payroll Per Full Time Equivalent Employee

New York City’s higher education instructional employees received below average pay relative to the private sector; New York State’s instructional employees were paid slightly more than average.

Local government higher education instructional employees were paid less than their private sector counterparts, relative to the national average, in New York City, the Downstate Suburbs, and New Jersey. The City’s non-instructional higher education workers were paid 47 percent more than the national average, and more than in New Jersey and other areas of the state. To return to the local government employment and payroll spreadsheet, click here.

New York State’s higher education instructional employees were paid slightly more, on average, than those in the nation as a whole ($4,483 in March 1997 vs. $4,290). Many of those employees, however, work at C.U.N.Y or S.U.N.Y. Stonybrook, in high cost Downstate New York. New Jersey’s higher educational instructional employees were paid more ($5,861) than those in New York State, and 37 percent more than the national average. State non-instructional employees earned 13 percent more than the national average in New York, and 31 percent more than average in New Jersey. To return to the state public employment and wages spreadsheet, click here.

Chart 4:13: Local Government Education Percent Of Total Non-Agricultural Employment By Area

Source: Current Employment Survey, New York Department of Labor, and U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Annual average data. Local government education includes both elementary and secondary schools and higher education (ie. community colleges). Note: in this data series, the counties grouped elsewhere in the report as the Upstate Metros could not be reported separately from those grouped as the Rest of New York State; all of the state north of Westchester and Rockland are grouped together as Upstate New York.

According to yet another alternative data source, New York City’s local government education employment was below the national average, while other parts of New York State were above average, through the year 2000.

Current Employment Survey data, compiled by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics and affiliated state departments of labor, provides a check on the Census of Governments employment data, and a way to look beyond 1997. According to this data, local government education accounted for 5.0 percent of all the non-agricultural jobs in New York City in 1997. This was well below the national average of 5.6 percent, and far below the share in the Downstate Suburbs (7.2 percent), or Upstate New York as a whole (7.5 percent). New Jersey, at 5.7 percent, was about average. This is annual average data, that is the average of the 12 monthly surveys.

From 1997 to 2000, New York City’s local government education employment rose by 8.6 percent, but its overall employment rose nearly as fast, so local government education remained at 5.0 percent of total employment. In New Jersey and the United States, as well, a steep rise in local government education employment combined with a steep rise in overall employment, leaving the ratio between the two unchanged. In the Downstate Suburbs and Upstate New York, the growth of local government education outpaced overall job growth, and its share of total employment rose. It had risen, as well, from 1993 to 1997.

Detailed data on elementary and secondary schools alone is available for New York City, New York State, and (by subtraction) New York State outside of New York City. In 1997, local government elementary and secondary school employment accounted for 4.0 percent of total employment in New York City, and 6.8 percent in New York State outside New York City. Put another way, there were 1,714 public school employees for every 100,000 New York City residents, and 2,847 such employees per 100,000 residents elsewhere in New York State, according to the Current Employment Survey. The employment/population ratio, based on recently-released 2000 census of population data, is not affected by the exclusion of agriculture in the CES, but tells the same story.

For a spreadsheet of this data, click here.

Section 4 Summary

New York City’s public elementary and secondary school spending was low as a percent of its residents’ income. In fact, if it were a separate state, New York City’s public school spending would be among the lowest in the nation, even though its state and local tax burden is high. Public school spending was also low as a share of personal income in counties containing other older and larger central cities.

Public school spending was above average in the Downstate Suburbs, and far above average in Upstate New York. Spending in the Downstate Suburbs was higher than in many other suburban areas, including the average for New Jersey. Spending in the Rest of New York State was higher even than in Alaska.

While New York City spent less in local tax dollars than average on public schools, its low spending was primarily as result of low state aid. Below average state aid, combined with above average spending, was in part responsible for high local taxes in the Downstate Suburbs. The Upstate Metros and the Rest of New York State received more state aid than average, but their spending was so high that the portion financed by local taxes was also above average.

New York City’s public school spending closed the gap with the national average in FY 1999. It remained far below other parts of New York State and New Jersey.

New York City’s public school employment was relatively low, and remained so through 2000. Relative to the private sector, the pay of its public school employees was also below the national average. The Downstate Suburbs, New Jersey, the Upstate Metros, and the Rest of New York State all have more public school instructional employees relative to population than the national average, and pay them more than average relative to the private sector.

New York City’s local government higher education (ie. community college) spending, employment, and pay per instructional employee, were relatively low by national standards. Spending was above average in other parts of New York State; employment was above average in the Downstate Suburbs and Upstate Metros.

The State of New York’s higher education spending and employment are relatively low. Charges cover a below-average share of higher education spending in New York State than in New Jersey or the nation.

To move to Section 5, click here.