IBJNews

Indiana funding jump would end kindergarten fees

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Parents across Indiana weary of paying sometimes-hefty fees for their children to attend full-day kindergarten classes could soon catch a break.

State legislators are poised to adopt a plan directing about $80 million more in the coming year toward school districts for providing full-day kindergarten — with the caveat that districts can no longer charge extra fees.

The state began providing funding for full-day kindergarten programs in 2005, with that amount growing from an initial $8.5 million to nearly $82 million for the current school year. The state funding for the extra hours of kindergarten classes, however, has always lagged far behind what school districts received for the traditional half-day programs.

That has led many school districts to charge fees ranging from about $1,000 to more than $2,500 a year.

The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday endorsed the additional money for full-day kindergarten that was included in a bill that cleared the House last month on a 96-2 vote.

The plan still must gain final legislative approval, but the Legislature's budget leaders are in agreement that the kindergarten money should be included in the plan to spend a portion of $320 million in corporate taxes that officials found late last year. That money had been collected over four years but not properly deposited in state accounts.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jeff Espich, R-Uniondale, says he's confident that most school districts will be able to provide full-day kindergarten without additional fees based on a review of school spending on the programs.

School districts now receive about $2,750 — half of the state's average per-pupil funding — for each kindergarten student. The extra funding for next school year will give school districts $2,400 per child to cover the other half of the kindergarten day, up from nearly $1,250 this year.

The state Department of Education and the state's school groups don't track how many districts are charging full-day kindergarten fees, but most districts should be able to afford the programs without those fees, said Dennis Costerison, an education lobbyist and executive director of the Indiana Association of School Business Officials.

"For many districts, the money will fully fund it and we're getting much, much closer to having a fully funded full-day kindergarten program," Costerison said. "There's no doubt with these dollars."

The expansion of full-day kindergarten programs has been popular with parents.

State Department of Education figures show that nearly 66,500 kindergartners are in full-day programs this school year, with about 11,700 in half-day programs. That is a reversal from 2006, when about 10,000 children attended full-day programs and nearly 66,000 were enrolled in half-day kindergarten.

Some in the Statehouse, however, maintain that the state budget should provide the same amount for full-day kindergartners as it does for older students — and not just partial funding based on an extra pool of money.

"They are going in the right direction, but until that kindergarten student is counted as one student in the count, full-day kindergarten will not be fully funded," said Democratic Rep. Terry Goodin of Austin, who is superintendent of the Crothersville Community Schools.

Goodin said his school district has not been charging for full-day kindergarten, but that he realizes why many others might need to do so.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, doesn't believe districts need as much money to educate a kindergartner as they need for a high school student taking classes such as calculus and chemistry

"I think if we actually went in and did an industrial-level study on how much it costs to teach kindergartners, I think they'd be getting less than they're getting with this," Kenley said.

The state still won't require children to attend kindergarten, but state schools Superintendent Tony Bennett said the funding increase will remove a financial barrier to some families for the full-day program.

"I heard more and more districts say last year they were going to bring kids into full-day kindergarten, so I don't think this is going to do anything but bring in even more," Bennett said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • kindergarten funding
    I understand where you are coming from, but think you have it reversed. Funding needs to be available prior (or simlutaneously) to making kindergarten mandatory. Additionally, making just half day mandatory (and funded) is not logistically possible for many families...so the only option to making kindergarten mandatory is to require and fund a whole day.
  • kindergarten funding
    All day kindergarten funding is a joke. How about making kindergarten mandatory first. I don't understand funding something when it isn't even mandatory. In the state of Indiana a child does not have to be a registered student until the age of 7. Maybe the state should revise that law first!

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

    2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

    3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

    4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

    5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

    ADVERTISEMENT