# What Are We Spending on Special

Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

Report 1 Updated June 2004

Prepared by: Jay G. Chambers, SEEP Director Thomas B. Parrish, CSEF Director

Jenifer J. Harr

Submitted to: United States Departm ent of Education, Office of Special Education Programs

This study was funded by the U.S. Depa rtment of Education under Contract

Number ED99CO0091. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the view or policies of the Department of Education. 

# Special Education Expenditure Proj e c

tWhat Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page i 

# Acknowledgements

Primary support for this research comes from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). The authors wish to express their appreciation for the guidance and suggestions of Louis Danielson in his capacity as Director, Research to Practice Division, Office of Special Education programs, and Scott Brown in his capacity as Project Officer for the Special Education Expenditure Project (SEEP).

The authors also acknowledge the support for this research received from nine states that

contributed to the data collection effort for SEEP. State directors of special education for the nine states included in the extended samp le of districts, schools, teachers, and students are listed at the end of these acknowledgements.

The authors would like to express their gratitude to a large team of American Institutes for Research (AIR) staff who contributed to the comple tion of this report. First and foremost is Maria Perez who spent countless hours organizing the st udent database and developing the computer programs necessary for conducting the analysis on which much of this report is based. Her dedication to “getting it right” and her care in reviewing the numbers she produced have contributed significantly to the quality of this analysis. Thanks also go to Gur Hoshen who provided significant support to Maria in the conduct of this analysis and who was involved in the development of the programs necessary to create the sampling weights.

Irene Lam guided the process of cleaning the various databases used in this report, conducted the analysis of transportation expenditures, and wo rked on analyzing the school database. Irene’s work ethic and her high degree of competence have contributed substantially to this report. Irene

also worked in close collaboration with Bob Mo rris, who spent most of his waking hours during the last year constructing the school personnel data base, using the primary data collected as part of the SEEP, as well as countless state personnel data systems, and various other state and federal

data sources.

The authors also thank Jamie Shkolnik who pulled t ogether the district level fiscal data from state fiscal files and from the original SEEP data collection.

Roger Levine, as always, provided tremendous support in helping design and implement the sample selection process and in helping to cons truct the sampling weights necessary to develop population estimates.

Others who contributed in various capacities duri ng the data collection, database development, and analysis phases of this project include Amyn ah Dhanani, Leslie Brock, Cheryl Graczewski,

and Sandra Smith.

It is also important to recognize the significant efforts of the data collectors and analysts who helped obtain the original sources of data on wh ich this entire project is based. The authors acknowledge the special contributions of Marie Da lldorf, who managed the data collection effort,

and Rafi Youatt and Kristi Andes- Peterson, who managed the data coordinators. Thanks are also due to James Van Campen and Rafi Youatt for playing significant roles in designing the procedures and training for the data collection.

Thanks also go to Jean Wolman who provided many valuable comments and suggestions, many of which have been incorporated into the final report.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page ii 

### Finally, the authors wish to acknowledge Phil Esra for his significant contributions to report production. Phil played a major role in editing a nd formatting this document, and was responsible for the development of the graphi c exhibits contained in this report. His diligence and care are greatly appreciated and contribute immeasura bly to the quality of the final product.

The following is a comprehensive list of all th e individuals who have contributed to the SEEP during the course of the past two years and their various capacities with the project.

Project Design Team: Jay Chambers (Project Director), Tom Parrish (Director, Center for Special Education Finance), and Roger Levine (Task Leader for Sample Design).

Senior Consultants: Margaret McLaughlin, Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children and Youth, University of Maryland; Margaret Goer tz, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Technical Work Group: Stephen Chaikind, Gallaudet University; Doug Gill, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Washington State; Diane Gillespie, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia; Bill Hartman, Pennsyl vania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania; John Herner, Division of Special Education, Ohio Department of Education; Donald Kates, Georgetown University, Child Development Center; Brian McNulty, Adams County School District 14, Commerce City, Colo rado; Jim Viola, New York State Education Department.

State Directors of Special Education in the nine extended sample states: Alabama, Mabrey Whetstone, State Director, and Barry Blackwell, liaison; Delaware

, Martha Brooks, State Director and Debbie Stover, liaison; Indiana

, Robert Marra, State Director, and Hank Binder, liaison; Kansas

, Bruce Passman, State Director, and Carol Dermyer, liaison; Missouri

, Melodie Friedebach, State Director, and Bill Daly, liaison; New Jersey

, Barbara Gantwerk, State Director, and Mari Molenaar, liaison; New York

, Larry Gloeckler, State Director, and Inni Barone, liaison;

Ohio

, Ed Kapel, State Director; Rhode Island

, Tom DiPaola, State Director, and Paul Sherlock, member, Rhode Island legislature.

Managers of data collection and processing: James Van Campen, Rafi Youatt, Marie Dalldorf,

and Kristi Andes Peterson.

Data collectors and support teams include the following:

Team leaders: Peg Hoppe, Michael “Chad” Rodi, Jennifer Brown, Andy Davis, Leslie Brock, Jeanette Wheeler, and Jean Wolman. Team members: Mary Leopold, Claudia Lawrence, Patrice Flach, Bette Kindman-Koffler, Brenda Stovall, Danie lle Masursky, Ann Dellaira, Eden Springer, Jack Azud, Nancy Spangler, Melania Page-Gaith er, Raman Hansi, Chris White, Lori Hodge, Freya Makris, Megan Rice, Amynah Dhanani, Me linda Johnson, Carmella Schaecher, Iby Heller, Hemmie Jee, and Irene Lam.

Data collection support team: Emily Campbell, Ann Win, Sandra Smith and Diana Doyal.

Data Analysis Team: Maria Perez, Gur Hoshen, Jamie Shkol nik, Amynah Dhanani, Irene Lam, Bob Morris, and John DuBois.

Report production teams: Phil Esra, Jenifer Harr, Leslie Brock, Cheryl Graczewski, Jamie Shkolnik, Irene Lam, and Maria Perez.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page iii 

# SEEP Reports

This document is a part of a series of reports based on descriptive information derived from the Special Education Expenditure Project (SEEP), a national study conducted by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) for the U.S. Depart ment of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). SEEP is the fourth project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and its predecessor, the Department of Health, Educatio n and Welfare, in the past 40 years to examine the nation’s spending on special education and related services. See Kakalik, Furry, and Carney (1981), Moore, Strang, Schwartz, and Braddock (1988), and Rossmiller, Hale, and Frohreich (1970).

The SEEP reports are based on analyses of extens ive data for the 1999-2000 school year. The SEEP includes 23 different surveys to collect data at the state, district, and school levels. Survey respondents included state directors of special education, district directors of special education, district directors of transportation services, school principals, special education teachers and related service providers, regular education t eachers, and special education aides. Survey responses were combined with other requested doc uments and data sets from states, schools, and districts to create databases that represented a sample of approximately 10,000 students with disabilities, more than 5,000 special education teachers and related service providers, approximately 5,000 regular education teachers, more than 1,000 schools, and well over 300 local education agencies.

The series of SEEP reports will provide descrip tive information on the following issues:

• What are we spending on special education services for students with disabilities in the

U.S.?

• How does special education spending vary across types of public school districts?

• What are we spending on due process for students with disabilities?

• What are we spending on transportation services for students with disabilities?

• How does education spending vary for students by disability and what factors explain differences in spending by disability?

• What role do functional abilities play in expl aining spending variations for students with

disabilities?

• What are we spending on preschool programs for students with disabilities?

• Who are the teachers and related service provi ders who serve students with disabilities?

• How are special education teaching assistants used to serve students with disabilities?

• What are we spending on special education services in different types of schools?

• How does special education spending vary acr oss states classified by funding formula, student poverty, special education en rollment levels, and income levels?

One of the SEEP reports will also be devoted to describing the purpose and design of the study.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page iv 

# Table of Contents

Highlights..................................................................................................................... ....... v I. Introduction ................................................................................................................ . 1 A Conceptual Framework for Analyz ing Special Education Spending.................. 1 Overview of Report................................................................................................. 2 II. Total Spending on Students with Disabilities ............................................................. 2 Additional Expenditure to Educate a Student with a Disability ............................. 4 Changes in Spending Over Time ............................................................................ 6 Changes in Spending Ratio Over Time .................................................................. 7 III. Allocation of Special Education Expenditures............................................................ 9 Components of Special Education Spending.......................................................... 9

Direct Instruction a nd Related Services ........................................................... 10 Administration and Support ............................................................................. 10 Transportation .................................................................................................. 11 Per Pupil Spending on Special Education Services .............................................. 12 Expenditures on Assessment, Evaluati on, and IEP Related Activities................. 13

IV. Allocation and Use of Federal Funds ........................................................................ 15 V. Summary and Conclusions........................................................................................ 17

Exhibits

Exhibit 1. Total spending on students with disabilities who are eligible for special education services in the U.S., 1999-2000.........................................................3

Exhibit 2. Calculation of additional expenditure on a st udent with a disability.................4 Exhibit 3. Changes in total spending per special education pupil over time......................6 Exhibit 4. Ratio of spending per special and regular education student over time ............8 Exhibit 5. Allocation of special education expenditures, 1999-2000.................................9 Exhibit 6. Per pupil special education spending, 1999-2000............................................12 Exhibit 7. Assessment, evaluation, a nd IEP related expenditures, 1999-2000.................14 Exhibit 8. Allocation of special education funds by function, 1999-2000 .......................16

Appendices

Appendix A: SEEP Samples......................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B: Data Used for Report ...............................................................................B-1 Appendix C: Data Sources ............................................................................................C-1What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page v 

# Highlights

• Total special education spending. During the 1999-2000 school year, the 50

states and the District of Columbia spent approxim ately $50 billion on special education services, amounting to $8,0 80 per special education student.

• Total regular and special education spending on students with disabilities. The total spending to provide a combinat ion of regular and special education

services to students with disabilities amounted to $77.3 b illion, or an average of $12,474 per student. An additi onal one billion dollars was expended on students with disabilities for other special needs programs (e.g., Title I, English language learners, or gifted and ta lented students), bringing the per student amount to $12,639.

• Additional expenditure on special education students. The additional expenditure to educate the av erage student with a disabi lity is estimated to be $5,918 per student. This is the differen ce between the tota l expenditure per student eligible for special education se rvices ($12,474) and the total expenditure per regular educati on student ($6,556).

• Percent of total expenditure. The total regular and speci al education expenditure for educating students with disabilitie s represents over 21 percent of the 1999- 2000 spending on all elementary and secondary educational services in the U.S.

• Total spending ratio. Based on 1999-2000 school year data, the total expenditure to educate the average student w ith disabilities is an estimated 1.90 times that expended to educate the typical regular e ducation student with no special needs. This ratio has actually dec lined since 1985, when it was estimated by Moore et al. (1988) to be 2.28.

• Total current spending ratio. Excluding expenditures on school facilities, the ratio of current operating expenditures on th e typical special education student is

2.08 times that expended on the typical regular education student with no special

needs.

• Federal funding. Local education agencies receiv ed $3.7 billion in federal IDEA funding in 1999-2000, accounting for 10.2 pe rcent of the additional total expenditure on special education students (or $605 per special education student), and about 7.5 percent of to tal special educat ion spending. If Medicaid funds are included, federal funding covers 12 percen t of the total addi tional expenditure on special education students (i.e., 10.2 percent from ID EA and 1.8 percent from Medicaid).What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 1 

# I. 

# Introduction

• How much is the nation spending on serv ices for students with disabilities?

• What is the additional expenditure used to educate a student with a disability?

• To what extent does the federal governm ent support spending on special education?

These three questions are the primary focus of this report. All data, unless otherwise indicated, correspond to the 1999-2000 school year. 1 

### This report and other SEEP reports use the phrase “student with a disability” to re fer to a student receiving special education services, as determined by the student’s In dividual Education Program (IEP), under the

Individuals with Disabiliti es Education Act (IDEA).



## A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Special Education Spending

Before presenting the numbers, it is important to distinguish between total special education spending and total spending to educate a student with a disability

. Total special education spending includes amounts used to empl oy special education teachers, related service providers, and special education administra tors, as well as spending on special transportation services and non- personnel items (e.g., materials, supplies, technological supports) purchased under the au spices of the special education program. Some portion of special educat ion spending is used for in structional services that normally would be provided as part of the re gular education curriculum offered to regular

education students.

In contrast to total sp ecial education spending , total spending to educate a student with a disability encompasses all school resources, including both special and regular education and other special needs programs, used to provide a comprehensive educational program

to meet student needs. Most students with disabilities spend subs tantial amounts of time in the regular education program and benef it from the same administrative and support

services as all other students.

With this distinction in mind, the additional e xpenditure attributable to special education students is measured by th e difference between the total spending to educate a student with a disability and the total spending to educate a regular education student (i.e., a

student with no disabilities or other special needs). This concept of additional expenditure emphasizes that what is being measured is a reflection of actual spending patterns on special and regular education st udents and not a reflection of some ideal concept of what

it should cost to educate either student. Th e numbers presented in this report represent

“what is” rather than necessarily “what ought to be.”

An extreme example helps clarify this con cept of additional expe nditure: consider a student who is served entirely within a special class designed for students with disabilities. This kind of placement is typica lly provided only to students with severe

1 All figures presented in this report are based on a sa mple of students designed to generalize to the entire population of students with disabilities in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 2 

### disabilities and the most signi ficant special needs. In such cases, virtually all of the

instructional and related se rvice personnel would be incl uded under special education spending. However, some of the services thes e students receive in a special class replace instruction that is provided to other students in a regular education classroom. Thus, the only way to measure the additional expenditures used for such severely disabled students is to compare the total spending used to educ ate these students to the total spending used to educate their regular education counterparts.

Another important conceptual issue that n eeds to be addressed before presenting the results of the analysis arises from the use of the term expenditure

. The previous studies of special education have used the term cost rather than expenditure. 2 

### However, all of these previous studies and this current study are actually expenditure studies. This report has deliberately used the term expenditure instead of cost to emphasize the fact that all that is being measured is the flow of dollars. The word cost , in contrast to expenditure , implies that one knows something about results. To say it cost twice as much to educate a special versus a regular education student implies that one is holding constant what is meant by the term “educate.” All of these studies (i ncluding the present study) are focused on expenditures with no implications about the results. The expenditure figures presented represent an estimate of the current behavior of the schools and districts across the nation and imply nothing about what spending is requir ed to provide similar results for students

with disabilities.



## Overview of Report

The report is divided into th e following four sections:

• Total Spending on Students with Disabilities

• Allocation of Special Education Expenditures

• Allocation and Use of Federal Funds

• Summary and Conclusions

Appendix A of this report provides additional information on the samples used for this project. Appendix B presents detailed versions of the tables on which all of the numbers presented in this report are based. Appendix C presents a brief discussion of the data

sources.



# II. Total Spending on Students with Disabilities

During the 1999-2000 school year, the U.S. sp ent about $50 billion on special education services. Another $27.3 billion was expended on regular education services and an additional one billion dollars was spent on other special needs programs (e.g., Title I, English language learners, or Gifted a nd Talented Education) for students with disabilities eligible for special education. Thus, total spending to educate all students

2 See Kakalik et al. (1981), Moore et al. (1988), Rossmiller et al. (1970).What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 3 

### with disabilities found eligible for special education programs amounted to $78.3 billion (see Exhibit 1).

In per pupil terms, the total spending used to educate the average student with a disability amounts to $12,639 (see Exhibit 2). Th is amount includes $8,080 per pupil on special education services, $4,394 per pupil on regular education services, and $165 per pupil on services from other special need programs (e.g., Title I, English language learners, or Gifted and Talented Educatio n). The total including only the regular and special education services amounts to $12,474 per pupil.

Based on these figures, the tota l spending to educate students with disabilities including regular education and special education represents 21.4 percent of the $360.6 billion total spending on elementary and secondary educa tion in the U.S. (see Table B-1, Appendix B). 3 

### Total special education spending alone ac counts for 13.9 percent of total spending and 15.4 percent of to tal current spending. 4

3 Including other special needs programs, the total spending represents 21.7 percent of the total spending on elementary and secondary education.

4 Total current spending is equal to total spending less the amounts expended on school and district facilities (e.g., school buildings and district offices). 

## Exhibit 1. Total Spendi ng On Students With Disabilities Who Are Eligi ble For Special Education
Services in the U.S., 1999-2000

Special Education Spending on Special

Education Students $50.0 billion Regular Education Spending $27.3 billion

Spending on Other Special Programs $1.0 billion



### Exhibit 1 reads : Total spending on regular, special, and other special needs education services to all eligible students with disabilities amounts to $78.3 billion, with $50 billion expended on special education services.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 4 

## Additional Expenditure to Ed ucate a Student with a Disability

How much more is being expended to educate a student with a disab ility than a student with no special programmatic needs? In other words, what is the additional spending on a student with a disab ility? Addressing this question permits a comparison of the special

education student to a consistent benchmar k—the regular education student who requires

no services from any special program (e.g., for students with disabilities, students from economically disadvantaged homes, or stude nts who are English language learners).

The data derived from SEEP indicate that the base expenditure on a regular education student amounts to $6,556 per pupi l. Comparing this figure to the average expenditure for a student eligible to receive special edu cation services, the additional expenditure 

# Exhibit 2. Calculation of Additional Expenditure on a Student with a Disability, 1999-2000

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000

Regular

education expenditure $4,394 Special

education expenditure $8,080 Other special

programs $165 A dditional expenditure

attributable to special

education

$5,918 Total: $ 12

, 639

Components of total expenditure

to educate a student with a

disabilit y Difference between expenditure to educate a regular education student and a student with a disability Total: $ 12

, 639

A dditional expenditure

attributable

to other special

programs $165 Expenditu r e to educate a regular

education

student with

no special

needs $6,556



### Exhibit 2 reads : The additional expenditure to provide regular and special education services to students with disabilities is estimated to be $5,918 (=$12,639 - $165 - $6,556). This concept of additional expenditure is the same as the concept of excess cost used in a previous study (Moore et al.

, 1988) of special education expenditures. For a more complete discussion of the use and meaning of these terms, see the section on the conceptual framework presented in the current report.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 5 

### amounts to $6,083 per pupil (i.e., $12,639 less $6,556). This additional expenditure reflects the amounts attributable to both the sp ecial education and related service needs of the typical student with disabi lities as well as the needs of this student for other special programs such as those designed for economi cally disadvantaged students or English language learners. If one excludes the othe r special needs programs, the additional expenditure attributable to sp ecial education and related serv ices for this student amounts to $5,918 per pupil (i.e., $12,639 less $165 less $6,556; see Exhibit 2).

Alternatively, this additional expenditure can be measured by the difference in the total spending to educate a special education stude nt and the total sp ending on a regular education student. Two alternative ratios may be calculated. As st ated previously, the total spending of $12,639 on a typical student with a disability is a comprehensive figure that includes special and regul ar education services, as well as other special needs programs. The ratio of this expenditure to educate a special education student to the spending on a regular education student (with no special needs) is estimated to be 1.93 (=$12,639/$6,556). Without spending on other sp ecial needs programs, the spending ratio may then be estimated as 1.90 ($12,639-$165/$6,556). This suggests that, on average, the nation spends 90 percent more on a special education student than on a regular education student.

In most states, school funding formulas are designed to provide revenues necessary to support current operating expenditure s for schools and school districts. 5 

### Expenditures on capital facilities such as school and central office buildi ngs are funded separately from the standard school funding formulas. The tota l expenditure figures reported above in

Exhibit 2 include both current operating expenditures and estimates of capital expenditures for serving special and regular education students. 6 

### If one excludes expenditures on capital facilities from the figures above, the ratio of current operating expenditure to educate a special education student relative to a regular education student is 2.08 (or 2.11 if other special programs are included). 7 

### In other words, the additional current operating expenditure to educate a special educat ion student is 108 percent of the current operating expenditure to educate a regular education student with no special

needs. The reason this ratio increases from 1.90 to 2.08 is that the additional time and personnel required to meet the needs of special versus regu lar education students exceeds the additional amount of classroom space nece ssary to serve thes e needs in relative

terms. 8

5 Current operating expenditures include salaries, empl oyee benefits, purchased services, supplies, tuition, and other annual expenditures for operations. Examples of items not included are capital outlays, debt service, facilities acquisition and construction, and property expenditures.

6 For more details on sources, see footnote 4 to Tables B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B of this report.

7 This ratio is calculated by dividing total current expenditures used to educate students with disabilities (excluding facilities) from Table B-1 ($11,096) by total current expenditure for a regular education student with no special needs (excluding facilities) from Table B-3 ($5,325 ). Thus, the ratio is 2.08 = 11,096 / $5,325. This 2.08 ratio compares to the 1.90 reported previously, and the 2.11 ratio compares to the 1.93 ratio reported in the text (which includes other special needs programs).

8 Consider the example of a special education student whose needs are met by adding the time of a resource specialist in the regular classroom. There is virtually no additional cl assroom space required (e.g., capital expenditure), while there is an increase in the time required of professional staff to provide services (e.g., operating expenditure).What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 6 

## Changes in Spending Over Time

Exhibit 3 illustrates how expenditures have changed over time by comparing the findings from this study with those from the previous three studies of speci al education spending sponsored by the U.S. Department of Educa tion and its predecessor, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. In constant dollars, total spending on special education has increased from an average of $9,858 per pupil in 1985-86 to $12,474 in 1999-2000, an annualized growth rate of 1.7 percent. 9 

### During this same period, total expenditure per pupil (including all students) in public elementary and secondary schools increased from $5,795 to $7,597, an annualized growth rate of 2.0 percent.

Since 1968-69, when the earliest study on speci al education expenditures was conducted, the total per pupil spending on students with disabilities has risen from $5,961 to $12,474 in constant dollars, while total spending per pupil in all public elementary and secondary schools has increased from $3,106 to $7,597. In ot her words, total per pupil spending on

9 Total spending to educate the typi cal student with a disabi lity amounts to $12,639 pe r student if Title I, English language learner, or Gifted and Ta lented Education services are included. 1968-69 1977-78 1985-86 1999-2000 1968-69 1977-78 1985-86 1999-2000 

# Exhibit 3. Changes In Special Education Spending Per Pupil Over Time

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000



### Per pupil in 1999-2000 dollars Per pupil in unadjusted dollars $5,961 $9

, 674 $9,858 $12,474

$1,257 $3,577 $6,335 $12,474



### Exhibit 3 reads : In constant dollars, total spending per special education student increased from an average $9,858 in 1985-86 to $12,474 in 1999-2000. 

## Exhibit 3. Changes in Total Spending Per Special Education Pupil Over TimeWhat Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 7 

### the average special education student has in creased by 110 percent, while total per pupil spending on all 

### elementary and secondary education students has increased by 140 percent. The substantial increases in both special and regular e ducation spending may perhaps be accounted for by changes in the supply of, and demand for, school personnel that have affected compensation or cha nges in the staffing ratios over time.

While per pupil spending for all students increased at a faster relative rate than per pupil spending on students with disabilities, total spending on students with disabilities as a percentage of total education spending increased from about 16.6 percent in 1977-1978 10



### to 21.4 percent in 1999-2000. Over the same pe riod, the percentage of students aged 0-22 who were receiving specia l education services in creased from about 8.3 percent to almost 13 percent of the total enrollment. The implica tion is that the growth in the numbers of students served in special education progr ams accounts for the incr ease in spending on special education.



## Changes in Spending Ratio Over Time

For the past decade, policymakers, researcher s, and practitioners familiar with special

education finance have estimated the ratio of total expenditure to educate a student with a disability 

### to the total expenditure to educate th e typical regular education student 

### to be

about 2.3

. 11 

### That is, the additional expenditure 

### on a student with disabilities was estimated to be 130 percent more (1.3 times ) than the amount spen t on a typical regular

education student.

Using the 1999-2000 school year SEEP data, th is spending ratio is now estimated to be 1.90 or 90 percent more than the amount spen t on a typical regular education student. Expressed in dollars, the additional expe nditure amounts to $5,918 per pupil over the base expenditure of $6,556. 12 

### Exhibit 4 shows how the esti mated expenditure ratio has changed over the time-span of the four special education expenditure studies. The ratio appears to have increased from 1.92 in 1968-69, to 2.17 in 1977-78, to a high of 2.28 in 1985-86. Since 1985-86, the ratio app ears to have declined to 1.90. 13

10 The 1977-78 school year was two years after passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, PL 94-142, the predecessor to the Individua ls with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.

11 The actual number cited later in this report is 2.28, but most individuals who have quoted the number

have rounded it to 2.3.

12 Estimates of per pupil expenditure for a regular education student are based on a combination of data from the SEEP school surveys and th e surveys for those special education students who spend the vast majority of their time in the regular education cl assroom. Expenditures for these students include both direct instruction as well as administration and support services provided to the typical regular education

student.

13 In addition to estimates based on the current SEEP, these ratios are derived from Kakalik et al. (1981), Moore et al. (1988), and Rossmiller et al. (1970). For a summary of these three previous studies, see Chaikind et al. (1993), Table 7.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 8 

### Exhibit 4 reads : In 1985-86, the total expenditure to educate a special education student was 2.28 times that spent on a regular education student. In 1999-2000, this

ratio decreased to 1.90.



### Several factors have likely affected the change s in this ratio over time. First, there has been a substantial increase in the proportion of students identified with less intensive service needs over recent decades. Since 1975, the proportion of students with learning

disabilities has increased from about one-f ourth of the population of students with disabilities to almost one-half. The special e ducational services necessary to meet these students’ needs may not be as costly as ot her disability categories, thus lowering the overall incremental expenditure.

Second, over the past ten years, there has been a decline in the exte nt to which special

education students are served outside of the regular education classr oom and in separate

school facilities. These trends toward less re strictive placements may have resulted in somewhat lower per pupil expenditures on sp ecial education inst ruction and related services (e.g., home-to-speci al school transportation). 14



### Working in the opposite direction to increase 

### the incremental expenditure are the

successes in medical science that have redu ced mortality among students with certain severely disabling conditions who might not have survived long enough to be enrolled in special education programs. Some of these students may be among the most severely disabled populations served currently under the IDEA, tending to increase the per pupil expenditure necessary to serve students with disabilities overall. 15

14 See Figure III-1 in the 22 nd Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act , U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs, 2000.

15 Further analysis of these trends and their implications will be carried out in subsequent reports based on

the SEEP database. 

## Exhibit 4. Ratio of Sp ending Per Special and Regular Education Student Over Time

2.17 2.28

1.90 1.92

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

1968-69 1977-78 1985-86 1999-2000What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 9 

# III. Allocation of Special Education Expenditures

Components of Special Education Spending

Focusing on the $50 billion of sp ecial education spending, it is useful to see how funds are allocated among different spending compone nts. Special educati on spending includes central office administration and support of the program, direct instruction and related services for preschool (ages 3 through 5) and school-aged (ages 6 through 22) students, special education summer school, progr ams for students who are homebound or hospitalized, and special tran sportation services. Exhibit 5 shows the dollar amount and percentage of special education spending on each of these components.

Exhibit 5 reads : Of the $50 billion spent on special education services, 61 percent or $30.7 billion was expended on school-aged special education programs in public

schools. 

# Exhibit 5. Allocation of Special Education Expenditures, 1999-2000

School-aged programs operated outside public schools (11%, $5.3 billion)

Preschool programs operated within public schools (8%, $4.1 billion)

Preschool programs operated outside public schools (1%, $263 million)

Other instructional programs (homebound & summer) (2%, $912 million)

Transportation services (7%, $3.7 billion)

A dministration & support services (10%, $5.0 billion) School-aged programs operated

within public schools

(61%, $30.7 billion)What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 10 

### Direct Instruction and Related Services



### During the 1999-2000 school year, over 80 percent of total special education expenditures were allocated to direct instruc tion and related services . This figure includes preschool programs, school-aged programs , summer school programs, and homebound and hospital programs. It takes into account the salaries of special education teachers, related service personnel, and special education teaching assistants. It also includes nonpersonnel expenditures (i.e., s upplies, materials, and capital outlay for specialized equipment) necessary to provide direct specia l education instruction and related services

to students with disabilities.

Direct instruction and related services for special education preschool programs represent approximately 9 percent of total special ed ucation expenditures, or $4.4 billion. The majority of preschool spending ($4.1 billion) occurs in schoo ls operated by public school districts. Most of the remaining funds allo cated to preschool programs ($263 million) are used to pay tuition and fees for preschool programs operated in non-public schools or public agencies other than public school distri cts, and to support di rect expenditures for

additional related services.

At $36 billion, instru ction and related services for school-aged students (ages 6-22) account for 72 percent of total special educa tion expenditures. Dir ect instruction and related services for programs operated by the student’s home district amount to approximately $31 billion. This represents more than 60 percent of total special education expenditures, serving almost 5.4 million of the 6.2 million special education students in

the 50 states and the District of Columbia. For the approximately 200,000 students placed in non-public school programs or programs ope rated by public agencies or institutions other than the public school di strict, the expenditure is $5. 3 billion. These expenditures include tuition, fees, and amounts allocated for other related services that are provided by the public school district.

Other instructional programs include hom ebound and hospital programs, as well as summer school programs for students with disabi lities. It is estimated that, for the 1999- 2000 school year, just under 40,000 students with disabilities were served in homebound and hospital programs, and that these program s account for less than 0.5 percent, or $98 million, of the total special education spending. Summer school programs serve about 10 percent of the total number of students (623,000) in special education programs, and account for about 1.6 percent ($815 million) of the total special education expenditures.

Administration and Support



### Overall, administration and support account fo r about 10 percent or $5 billion of total special education spending. Administrati on and support expenditures include three

components:What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 11 

### • Central office administrati on and support of the special education program -- $4 billion, or 8.2 percent of tota l special education expenditures. 

### This expenditure includes salaries of central office empl oyees, fees for contractors, and nonpersonnel expenditures to support staff in the performance of central office functions for the special education programs. These functions include administration, coordination, staff supe rvision, monitoring and evaluation, due process, mediation, litigation support, assessment of student progress, and eligibility determination.

• Certain categories of related service personnel assigned to the school site--$745 million, or 1.5 percent of total special education expenditures. 

### These categories of school-site staff spend a substantial por tion of their time involved in various indirect support activities related to assessment and evaluation of students with

disabilities. 16



### • Administration and support activities of special education schools--$131 million, or less than 0.3 percent of tota l special education spending. 

### These schools are designed explicitly and exclusively fo r serving students with disabilities— generally the most severely disabled students. 17



### Transportation



### It is estimated that approximately 840,000 stude nts with disabilities receive special hometo-school transportation services at a total expenditure of more than of $3.7 billion. These numbers suggest that less than 14 percent of students with disabili ties received special transportation services duri ng the 1999-2000 school year, re presenting about one-fourth of total expenditures on all home-to-school tr ansportation services provided in the U.S. 18



### Since 1985-86, the percentage of students receiving special transportation has dropped by more than half, and the per pupil expenditu re (expressed in constant dollars) has increased from about $2,463 to $4,418 (an increase of 80 percent). 19 

### These comparative data suggest that fewer student s are being transported today to separate special education schools and that perhaps only the most severe ly disabled students, who require more costly accommodations, are currently receiv ing special transportation services. The evidence further suggests that more student s with disabilities are receiving regular transportation services.

16 See the section about expenditures on assessment late r in this report for a more complete discussion.

17 Special schools include those oper ated by public school districts as well as state special education

schools.

18 According to figures reported by the sample districts, it is estimated that total transportation expenditures (regular and special transportation combined) amounts to more than $13 billion per year. Based on these figures, special education transporta tion represents about 27 percent of total transportation expenditures.

19 Moore et al. (1988) reported that 30 percen t of students with disabilities received special transportation services at an average expenditur e per student of $1,583. Using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjusted to the school year, per student expenditure adjusted to 1999-2000 dollars amounts to $2,463 [=1,583/(108.8/169.3) where 169.3 is the CPI for 1999-2000 school year and 108.8 is the CPI for the 1985- 86 school year].What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 12 

## Per Pupil Spending on Special Education Services

Exhibit 6 provides another perspective for e xploring special educat ion expenditures by dividing the total expenditure within each special education program component by the

number of students served within that com ponent to arrive at per pupil spending. These figures include only the special education expenditures associated with each component; they do not 

### include the full expenditure to educate these students since no regular education instruction or administrative exp enditures are included in these numbers 

### . The full expenditures on these various categories of students will be explored in one of the other reports in this series that will examine expenditures by placement.

Average special education spending on a school -aged student served in programs outside the public schools amounted to $26,440. This figure includes spending on the tuition for non-public schools and expenditures on any direct related services that might be provided by the public school district. In contrast, spec ial education spending on direct instruction and related services for school-aged students served within public schools amounted to $5,709 per pupil. For preschool students, th e special edu cation spending on students served in programs operated outside 

### public schools amounted to $9,062 per pupil, compared to $7,667 for those student s served in preschool programs within 

### public

schools.

The expenditures on central office administrati on of the special education program (i.e., the operations of the office of the director of special education within local education 

# Exhibit 6. Per Pupil Special Education Spending, 1999-2000

$662 $4,388 $7,667 $9,062 $26,440

$4,418 $5,709

$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000

Central office

administration of

the program Special school

administration

and support Preschool

programs operated w ithin

public schools Preschool

programs operated outside

public schools School-aged

programs operated w ithin

public schools School-aged

programs operated outside

public schools Transportation

services



### Exhibit 6 reads : An average $7,667 was spent per special education pupil in preschool programs operated within public schools, in contrast to $9,062 for preschoolers in programs operated outside public schools.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 13 

### agencies) amounted to $662 per pupil. Ad ministration and support expenditures for operation of a special educa tion school averaged $4,388. 20



## Expenditures on Assessment, Evaluation, and IEP Related

Activities

Previous studies have suggest ed that expenditures for the processes that determine the eligibility of students to be served in the special education program take up a substantial share of total special education spending. 21 

### For the purposes of this study, determination of eligibility involves a variety of activities including pre-refe rral and referral activities; initial screening; ongoing assessment, evalua tions, and reviews; a nd preparation of the Individualized Education Program (IEP). 22



### An estimate of expenditures on the determination of eligibility requires additional detailed information on how various types of school and district personnel allocate time among various direct and indirect activities that benefit the students they serve. First, with respect to school-level personnel, the estimates of expenditures on direct

instructional and related serv ice personnel reflect both compensation for time spent in

direct contact with students and additiona l non-contact time. This non-contact time includes preparation for instru ction and participation in formal and informal meetings, pre-referral activities, screening activities, and other ac tivities involved in initial and ongoing eligibility determination. In essen ce, the expenditure estimates for certain

instructional and related service activities in clude a multiplier that reflects the ratio of total paid hours of service by th e school district to the tota l hours of direct service or

contact with students.

Second, with respect to distri ct-level staff, expenditures on initial and ongoing eligibility determination activities are, for the most part, already reflected in the total salaries and

benefits of these central offi ce administration and support sta ff. Many central office staff, including directors of special education and other professionals, spend substantial portions of their time involved in activities related to eligibility determination.

Third, it is necessary to include expenditu res for eligibility determination activities by staff (e.g., psychologists, counselors, social workers, and consulting teachers) assigned by districts to school sites, who spend most of their time involved in assessment activities.

Finally, it is important to recognize that regu lar education teachers spend some portion of

their time involved in activitie s related to eligibility de termination for the special education program. Combining data on how special and regular education personnel allocate their time with the total expenditure estimates of their salaries and benefits, it is

20 This figure includes both special education schools operated within lo cal school districts as well as those operated by the state such as the state schools for the deaf and blind.

21 See the discussion in Moore et al. (1988), p. 100.

22 The IEP contains, among other components, information about the student’s progress, a statement of

educational goals



### , an evaluation of the student’s needs, and a listing of the types and intensity of services to be provided to the student to meet these needs.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 14 

### possible to estimate how much of these expe nditures were made on various aspects of eligibility determination.

Based on these combined data, it is estimated that total spending on eligibility determination activities, dur ing the 1999-2000 school year, wa s about $6.7 billion, or $1,086 per special education student. 23 

### As Exhibit 7 indicates, 28 percent of the total expenditure on these activities is accounted for by salaries and benefits of special education related service providers at the schoo l site, while 27 percent is spent on special education teachers, 23 percent on regular ed ucation teachers, and 22 percent on central office special education staff.

It is important to recognize that the $1,086 pe r pupil does not represen t the expenditure to determine the eligibility for any given student. While the fi gures above reflect the best

estimates of the total dollar s supporting these activities, th e denominator is simply the count of special education students. Some students who go through this process for determining eligibility are found ineligible to receive specia l education services. On the other hand, re-evaluations of students who ar e already in the speci al education program can, in many instances, be done with relatively li mited effort on the part of staff. Further data and analysis would be necessary to estimate differences in spending on this process

23 Estimates from previous studies of assessment expe nditures are extremely diffi cult to compare given the different methodologies employed. 

## Exhibit 7.

Assessment, Evaluation, and IEP Related
Expenditures, 1999-2000

Special Education

Teachers 27% ($1.8 billion) Related Service

Providers at the

School Site 28% ($1.9 billion)

Central Office Staff 22% ($1.5 billion) Regular Education

Teachers 23% ($1.6 billion)



### Exhibit 7 reads : Of the approximately $6.7 billion spent on eligibility determination activities, $1.9 billion (28 percent) were spent on the salaries and benefits of related service providers based at the school site. 

## Exhibit 7. Assessment, Evaluation, and

IEP Related Expenditures, 1999-2000What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 15 

### of eligibility determination for ongoing versus new special educati on students and for students with varying types of disabilities or with va rying severity of needs.



# IV. Allocation and Use of Federal Funds

In 1999-2000, local school districts received a total of $3.7 billion (or $605 per student) in federal IDEA funds for the purpose of providing special education services. 24 

### As such, federal funds supported 7.5 per cent of total special education expenditu res at the local level and 4.9 percent of total expenditures used to edu cate a student with disabilities. When taken as a percent of the additiona l expenditure on a special versus regular education student, federal IDEA funds am ounted to more than 10 percent of the additional expenditure on students with disabilities for the 1999-2000 school year. 25



### Exhibit 8 shows how these fe deral IDEA funds—basic and preschool—are allocated to instruction, related services, and administrati on, and it compares the use of federal funds

to the use of all federal and non-federal f unds that support special education spending. 26



### The first vertical bar shows that 63 percent of total special education spending is used for instruction, 27 percent is allocated to rela ted services, and the re st (10 percent) is

allocated to administration.

The second and third vertical bars in Exhibit 8 show how federal Part B-basic grants and preschool grants are used. Of those districts reporting the allocation of Part B basic grant funds, 64 percent of the funds were allocated to instruction, 25 percent were distributed to related services, and the remaining 11 percent were sp ent on administration and support services. In districts reporting how the presc hool funds were spent, almost three-fourths of the funds were used for instruction, 21 pe rcent were allocated to related services, and the remaining 6 percent we re expended on administration and support services.

24 These only include federal IDEA Part B funds, basi c and preschool grants, that flow through the state education agencies to the local school districts. The average per pupil amount of federal funding awarded to the states for 1999-2000 was about $734 (or $4.5 billion, including $4.2 billion for the basic grant and $371 million for the preschool grant). Approximately 17 percen t of the federal funds were retained at the state

level.

25 In fact, federal IDEA funding to local education ag encies is 10.2 percent of additional total expenditure (=$605/$5,918) and 10.5 percent of additional total curr ent expenditure (=$605/$5,771) used to educate the average special education student.

26 It should be noted that data on federal allocation was available for only a subset of the sample districts. For the basic grant, 155 districts reported on the use of federal funds, while 135 districts reported how the preschool grant funds were expended.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 16 

### Medicaid is another source of federal fundi ng for providing special education services. Using the data for the subset of reporting dist ricts, 44 percent of di stricts recovered funds spent on special education services from Medi caid, with an average of $105 per special education student. This represents an es timated national total of $648 million from Medicaid sources, or about 1.3 percent of total special educ ation expenditures, or about 1.8 percent of additional spending on the average st udent with disabilities.

Thus, as of the 1999-2000 school year, tota l federal IDEA and Medicaid support of special education spending at the local level re presents about 8.8 per cent of total special education spending, or about 12 percent of additional spending on special education

students. 

## Exhibit 8. Allocation of Special Education Funds by

Function, 1999-2000

63% 64% 73% 27% 25% 21% 11% 10% 6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Special education

spending of federal

and non-federal funds IDEA, Federal, Part BBasic Grant Funds IDEA, Federal, Part BPreschool Grant Funds Administration

Related services

Instruction



### Exhibit 8 reads : In 1999-2000, 64 percent of the $4.2 billion IDEA Basic grant was allocated to instruction, 25 percent to related services, and 11 percent to administration. This is comparable to how all special education funds were spent, with 63 percent on instruction, 27 percent on related services, and 10 percent on

administration.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research, Page 17 

# V. Summary and Conclusions

During the 1999-2000 school year, the 50 states and the District of Columbia spent approximately $50 billion on special education services, amounting to $8,080 per special education student. However, the total spendi ng to provide a combin ation of regular and special education services to students with di sabilities amounted to $77.3 billion, or an average of $12,474 per student (not including other special needs programs, such as Title I). This total expenditure for educating st udents with disabilities represents over 21 percent of the 1999-2000 spending on all elemen tary and secondary educational services

in the U.S.

The data presented for this report also sugge st that the expenditure used to educate the average special education student is about 1.90 

### times that expended to educate a regular education student with no special needs. In other words, the additional expenditure 

### on the typical special education student is about 90 percent of spending on a regular education student with no special needs. Focusing only on total current operating expenditures (i.e., if one excludes the estimated replacement costs of school facilities),

this ratio increases to 2.08 

### (i.e., 2.08 times the spending on a regular education student).

Over the period from 1977-78 to 1999-2000, to tal spending to educat e special education students has increased from 16.6 percent to 21.4 percent of total education spending, about a 30 percent increase. Over the same period, students identified as eligible for special education services increased from 8.5 to 13 percent of total enrollment, a more than 50 percent increase. At the same time, the ratio of spending on special education students to spending on regular education students has declin ed from 2.17 to 1.90. Thus, the increase in special education spending that has occurred over the past twenty plus years appears largely a result of increases in the number of st udents identified as eligible for the program.

Federal support for special education services comes for the most part from the IDEA. In 1999-2000, local education agencies received $3.7 billion in federal IDEA funds, and these funds represent 10.2 per cent of the additional expend iture to educate a special education student. In addition, more than two- fifths of districts re ported recovering funds spent on special education from Medicaid, a nd this amounted to an additional $105 per special education student or 1.8 percent of additional expenditure. The combination of federal IDEA and Medicaid funds, therefore, accounted for about 12 percent of additional expenditures on special education students.

This report represents the first in a series of reports that will explor e in greater depth the factors that underlie special education spending patterns acro ss local jurisdictions, over time, and on different categories of students. These analyses will show the tremendous diversity of needs represented among students id entified as eligible for special education services. The analyses will also explore how student characteristics and the

characteristics of districts and states are related to variati ons in spending on students with disabilities. Further analysis will also examine specific components of special education expenditures such as due proce ss and transportation services.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research 

# Bibliography

Agron, J. (2001). Building for the Boom, 27 th 

### Annual Official Education Construction Report. In How Much Does a New School Cost by Region? 

### (pp.38-39). Available:

www.asumag.com

Chaikind, S., Danielson, L.C., & Brauen, M. L. (1993). What do we know about the costs of special education? A selected review. The Journal of Special Education, 26 

### (4), 344-

370.

Kakalik, J., Furry, W., Thomas, M., & Carney, M. (1981). The Cost of Special Education



### . Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

Little Institute. (1996). The School Design Primer: A How-To Manual for the 21 st



### Century. 

### NC: Author.

Moore, M.T., Strang, E.W., Schwartz, M., & Braddock, M. (1988). Patterns in Special Education Service Delivery and Cost 

### . Washington, DC: Decision Resources Corp. (ERIC Document Reproduction Se rvice No. ED 303 027)

National Center for Edu cation Statistics. (1999). How Old Are America’s Public

Schools? 

### (Issue brief 1999-048). Washington, DC: Author.

Rossmiller, R.A., Hale, J.A., & Frohreich, L. (1970). Educational Programs for Exceptional Children: Resource Configurations and Costs 

### . Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Department of Educational Administration.

U.S. Department of Educati on, Office of Special Educati on and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs. (2000). 22 nd 

### Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 

### . Washington, DC:

Author.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research 

# Appendix A

SEEP Samples

The SEEP surveys were sent to a stratified random sample of districts and schools (see “SEEP Reports”) that included representatives from the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Samples

of school districts were selected within each of the states (a minimum of two districts in each state, except for Hawaii and the District of Colu mbia, which have only one school district each). Samples from larger states included more districts. Intermediate education units (IEUs) were selected from among IEUs serving the districts incl uded in the sample. IEUs were surveyed only if they received funds directly from the state for serving their students and essentially operated independently of the school districts in the region they serve.

Samples of elementary, secondary, and special education schools were selected from among the sampled districts and IEUs (where appropriate). In addition, state special education schools were also sampled.

Expanded samples of districts, IEUs, and schools were also selected through a series of nine separate contracts with individual states. 27 

### These states provided additional support for data collection, and these expanded samples are incl uded in the analyses presented in these reports.

Data were collected from all special education teachers and related service providers assigned to the schools in the sample. In addition, sampl es of regular education teachers and special

education teacher aides were selected from the staff in these schools.

Finally, the special education teachers and related service providers were each asked to select a sample of two students with disabilities from the ro sters of students they serve. To prevent the possibility of a student being selected multiple times, the research team developed sample selection procedures so that students were only selected from the most restrictive placement possible for any given student. The sample selecti on procedures were designed to ensure that the service provider most knowledgeable about any student completed the survey about the student.

The student sample on which many of the analyses are based comes from 1,053 of the 1,767 schools included in our original sample (represen ting 45 states and the District of Columbia). This sample includes 330 regular local educational agencies, 14 IEUs, and 7 state special education schools. Analysis of the patterns of response suggests that the samples on which these estimates are based do not appear to exhibit any response bias.

27 These nine states include Alabama, Delaware, Indi ana, Kansas, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio,

and Rhode Island.What Are We Spending on Special Education Services in the United States, 1999-2000?

American Institutes for Research 

# Appendix B

Data Used for ReportTable B-1Total Education Spending to Educate Students with Disabilities in the U.S., 1999-2000(including regular education and special education but excluding other special needs programs)1Spending ComponentsExpenditure perstudent served2Standard errorTotal estimatedpopulation of specialstudents in thiscategory2Total expenditures2Percent of the totalexpenditureTotal specialeducation spendingPercent of totalspecial educationexpenditureSpecial Education Central Office Administration and Support3Professional staff$477$836,186,822$2,950,997,9003.82%$2,950,997,9005.9%Non-certified staff$90$106,186,822$555,630,4420.72%$555,630,4421.1%Contracted personnel$27$56,186,822$168,016,1840.22%$168,016,1840.3%Non-personnel expenditures$47$66,186,822$288,739,8690.37%$288,739,8690.6%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--Central Office Administration of Special Ed Program4$21$26,186,822$131,380,1330.17%$131,380,1330.3%Total special central officeadministration and support$662$936,186,822$4,094,764,5285.30%$4,094,764,5288.2%Regular Education Central Office Administration and Support5Total regular central office administration and support$503$146,186,822$3,090,487,9004.00%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--Central Ofc Administration of the District4$27$36,186,822$165,144,3760.21%Total regular districtadministration and support$530$146,186,822$3,255,632,276Special Education School Administration and Support6Professional staff$1,938$22629,848$57,848,4380.07%$57,848,4380.1%Non-certified staff$1,764$23429,848$52,660,7710.07%$52,660,7710.1%Non-personnel expenditures$246$4129,848$7,328,3720.01%$7,328,3720.0%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--non-class specialeducation school facilities4$440$2329,848$13,122,7410.02%$13,122,7410.0%Total special school administration and support$4,388$40229,848$130,960,3220.17%$130,960,3220.3%Regular Education SchoolAdministration and Support6Professional staff$506 $22 5,894,111 $2,982,491,7373.86%Non-certified staff$329 $13 5,894,111 $1,940,246,3582.51%Non-personnel expenditures$47 $5 5,894,111 $276,294,4220.36%Annualized Facilities Expendituresgenerated by Regular School Admin.4$794 $40 5,894,111 $4,682,115,3026.06%Total regular school administration and support$1,676$355,894,111 $9,881,147,81912.79%Assessment Expenditures at the School Siteon Selected SpecialEducation Staff7Assessment on sp ed consulting tchr/psyc/cnslrs/soc wkrs $1265,923,959 $745,150,1020.96%$745,150,1021.5%Total Assessment$1265,923,959 $745,150,1020.96%$745,150,1021.5%Preschool Services in Schools Operated by Public School Districts8Preschool-Regular Education Instructional ServicesPreschool - Regular Teachers$2,009$283264,404$531,098,5360.69%Preschool - Regular Paraprofessional and aides$167$27256,354$42,777,5380.06%Preschool Regular- Non-personnel expenditures$158$20290,599$46,521,4550.06%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Preschool Regular Classroom Teachers4$417$43256,354$107,018,2710.14%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Other Preschool TeachersProviding Special Needs Programs (Title I, ESL, GATE)4----------Preschool-Special Education Instruction and Related ServicesPreschool - Special Teachers$4,107 $466 391,051 $1,606,236,6732.08%$1,606,236,6733.2%Preschool - Related service staff$3,389 $490 478,078 $1,620,327,8642.10%$1,620,327,8643.2%Preschool - Special Paraprofessional and aides $556 $99 377,150 $209,510,8830.27%$209,510,8830.4%Preschool - Non-personnel expenditures $666 $77 539,399 $359,503,3790.47%$359,503,3790.7%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Preschool Special Education Teachers4$835 $69 326,519 $272,624,2290.35%$272,624,2290.5%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Preschool ResourceSpecialist & Related Service Providers (pull out)4$203 $49 331,704 $67,482,2560.09%$67,482,2560.1%Total Preschool Services Operated by Public School Districts $9,015 $748 539,399 $4,863,101,0756.30%$4,135,685,2848.3%Preschool Services in Operated in Non-public Schools9External preschool - Tuition and fees$7,797$1,14529,100$226,876,3390.29%$226,876,3390.5%External preschool - Related services provided by district$2,281$61716,147$36,837,8220.05%$36,837,8220.1%Total Preschool Services Operated by Non-public Schools$9,062$1,28329,100$263,714,1610.34%$263,714,1610.5%School-Aged Services in Schools Operated by Public School Districts8School-Aged-Regular Education Instructional ServicesSchool-aged - Regular Teachers$2,553 $135 4,141,909 $10,574,985,37013.69%School-aged - Regular Paraprofessional and aides $191 $24 2,043,075 $389,900,8280.50%School-aged Regular - Non-personnel expenditures $214 $13 4,226,592 $903,605,9981.17%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by School-Aged Regular ClassroomTeachers4$242 $12 3,972,206 $959,365,3411.24%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Other School-Aged Resource TeachersProviding Special Needs Programs (Title I, ESL, GATE)4----------Spending ComponentsExpenditure perstudent served2Standard errorTotal estimatedpopulation of specialstudents in thiscategory2Total expenditures2Percent of the totalexpenditureTotal specialeducation spendingPercent of totalspecial educationexpenditureSchool-Aged-Special EducationInstruction and Related Services0.0%School-aged - Special Teachers$3,765 $157 4,888,728 $18,404,998,58023.82%$18,404,998,58036.8%School-aged - Related service staff$3,143 $506 2,378,816 $7,476,420,5239.68%$7,476,420,52314.9%School-aged - Special Paraprofessional and aides$338 $28 4,884,156 $1,652,783,0462.14%$1,652,783,0463.3%School-aged - Non-personnel expenditures$196 $9 5,384,560 $1,055,862,1771.37%$1,055,862,1772.1%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by School-Aged Special Education Teachers4$623 $45 2,555,968 $1,591,768,8762.06%$1,591,768,8763.2%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by School-Aged ResourceSpecialist & Related Service Providers (pull out)4$143 $7 3,918,071 $560,069,1700.72%$560,069,1701.1%Total School-aged$8,092 $232 5,384,560 $43,569,927,78356.40%$30,741,902,37261.4%School-Aged Services in Operated in Non-public Schools or Other Public Agencies9External school-aged - Tuition and fees$25,568$2,369200,292$5,121,113,3946.63%$5,121,113,39410.2%External school-aged - Related services provided by the district$2,346$42074,376$174,514,4520.23%$174,514,4520.3%Total External School-aged$26,440$2,341200,292$5,295,627,8466.85%$5,295,627,84610.6%Homebound and Hospital Programs10Homebound professional staff$1,91538,557$73,845,7290.10%$73,845,7290.1%Homebound Non-certified staff$12838,557$4,923,4300.01%$4,923,4300.0%Homebound contracted personnel$19738,557$7,595,9080.01%$7,595,9080.0%Homebound non-personnel expenditures$29238,557$11,265,6530.01%$11,265,6530.0%Total Homebound$2,53238,557$97,630,7200.13%$97,630,7200.2%Summer Programs11Summer - Professional staff$881 $51 623,373 $549,400,0830.71%$549,400,0831.1%Summer - Non-certified staff$351 $19 623,373 $218,843,9360.28%$218,843,9360.4%Summer - Contracted personnel$51 $4 623,373 $32,097,9640.04%$32,097,9640.1%Summer - Non-personnel expenditures$23 $3 623,373 $14,497,7300.02%$14,497,7300.0%Total Summer School$1,307 $66 623,373 $814,839,7141.05%$814,839,7141.6%Transportation Services12Special Transportation$4,418 $295 839,984 $3,710,889,8624.80%$3,710,889,8627.4%Regular Transportation$442 $17 1,125,345 $497,575,9930.64%Total Transportation Services$2,141 1,965,329 $4,208,465,8555.45%$3,710,889,8627.4%TOTAL EXPENDITURE TO EDUCATE STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES $12,474 $336 6,191,908 $77,252,731,492100.00%TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES USED TO EDUCATE STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES(excl facilities)$11,093 6,191,908 $ 68,702,640,797TOTAL SPECIAL EDUCATION EXPENDITURES $8,080 6,191,908 $ 50,031,164,911$ 50,031,164,911 100.00%TOTAL CURRENT SPECIAL EDUCATION EXPENDITURES (i.e., excluding facilities) $7,654 6,191,908 $ 47,394,717,506TOTAL EXPENDITURES ON PUBLIC ELEMENTARY & SECONARY EDUCATION$360,600,000,000Total expenditure to educate a student with a disability as percent of total spending21.4%Total special education spending as percent of total spending13.9%TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES ON PUBLIC ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION13$307,928,882,000Total current expenditure to educate a student withdisabilities as percent of total current spending22.3%Total current special education spending as percent of total current spending15.4%Total federal funds available to LEAs$605 6,191,908$3,746,020,406Percent of Special Education Expenditures supported by federal IDEA funds7.5%Percent of Current Special Education Expenditures (excl facilities) supported by federalfunds7.9%RATIOS OF PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE TO EDUCATE A STUDENT WITH AND WITHOUT DISABILITIESRatio using total expenditure1.90Ratio using total current expenditure2.08ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES TO EDUCATE A STUDENT WITH DISABILITIESAdditional total expenditure per pupil$5,918 6,191,908 $36,643,711,544Additional total current expenditure per pupil $5,769 6,191,908 $35,719,467,857FEDERAL IDEA FUNDING AS PERCENT OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITUREAs a percent of additional total expenditure per pupil 10.2%As a percent of additional total current expenditure per pupil 10.5%MEDICAID FUNDING$105 6,191,908 $648,016,471As a percent of total special education spending 1.3%As a percent of additional total expenditure 1.8%As a percent of additional total current expenditure 1.8%FEDERAL IDEA AND MEDICAID FUNDING OF SPECIAL EDUCATIONAs a percent of additional total expenditure per pupil 12.0%As a percent of additional total current expenditure per pupil 12.3%Table B-1 Footnotes1Excludes Title I, ESL, & GATE and uses same sample approach as Moore et al. (1988) for calculating regular education expenditures.2Total expenditures divided by the number of students will not yield the per pupil expenditure that is shown due to rounding.3Special education central administration andsupport expenditures were estimated fromthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part II: Special Education.4Expenditures on facilities are estimated using data about the space requirements for different types of classroom and non-classroom buildings within districts,the cost per square foot of construction,and the average life expectancies of school buildings in different parts of the country. Square footage of different typesof classrooms and the allocation of space in school buildings estimated from “The School Design Primer: A How-To Manual for the21st Century.” Estimatedcosts per square foot for school construction derived from “Building for the Boom, 27th Annual Official Education ConstructionReport.” Average age of schoolbuildings derived from “How Old Are America’s Public Schools?” Data were combined and annualized using standard present value calculations and a discountrate of 5% to reflect the relatively low interest rates in the current economy.5Regular education central administration andsupport expenditures were estimated fromthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part III: General Education.6Data were derived from existing state and district databasessolicited through the study, and supplemented with information from the questionnaires.7These only represent the expenditures on assessment, evaluation,and other IEP related activities that are not already accounted for in the total salaries ofteachers and related services personnel providing direct services to students with disabilities.8These expenditures are calculated from the Information Abouta Special Education Student survey, combined with information about teacher salaries andbenefits from the teacher questionnaires and extant data. Estimates of non-personnel expenditures are based on ratios of non-personnel to personnelexpenditures derived from the SEEPDistrict Questionnaires.9From questionnaires about students in non-public schools or publicinstitutions or agencies other than the public school district, excluding state specialschools, for which the district pays tuitions or transfers funds.10Homebound and hospital program expenditures per pupil are estimated from the section 5 ofthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part II-Special Educationsurvey. Numbers of students served in homebound programs are derived from WESTATdata prepared for the 22nd annual report to Congress from theDecember 1, 1999 counts of students.11Summer school per pupil expenditures are estimated from section 8 of theSEEP District Questionnaire, Part II: Special Education. Numbers of studentsserved in summer school programs are estimated from the SEEP student survey item that asks whether the child received summer school programs.12Transportation expenditures are estimated from the SEEP student survey item that askswhether the child received transportation services.13Total education expenditures are estimated from theDigest of Education Statistics, 2000, Table 163.NB: The figures in the 'Expenditure per student served' and 'Estimated total number of students served' columns have been rounded to the nearest decimalpoint and whole number, respectively. The figures in the 'Total expenditure' column were computed with the unrounded figures.Table B-2Total Education Spending to Educate Students with Disabilities in the U.S., 1999-2000(including regular education, special education and other special needs programs)1Spending ComponentsExpenditure perstudent served2Standard errorTotal estimatedpopulation ofspecial students inthis category2Total expenditures2Percent of the totalexpenditureTotal specialeducation spendingPercent of totalspecial educationexpenditureSpecial Education Central Office Administration and Support3Professional staff$477$836,186,822$2,950,997,9003.77%$2,950,997,9005.9%Non-certified staff$90$106,186,822$555,630,4420.71%$555,630,4421.1%Contracted personnel$27$56,186,822$168,016,1840.21%$168,016,1840.3%Non-personnel expenditures$47$66,186,822$288,739,8690.37%$288,739,8690.6%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--Central Office Administration of Special Ed Program4$21$26,186,822$131,380,1330.17%$131,380,1330.3%Total special central officeadministration and support$662$936,186,822$4,094,764,5285.23%$4,094,764,5288.2%Regular Education Central Office Administration and Support5Total regular central office administration and support$503$146,186,822$3,090,487,9003.95%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--Central Ofc Administration of the District4$27$36,186,822$165,144,3760.21%Total Regular DistrictAdministration and Support$530$146,186,822$3,255,632,276Special Education School Administration and Support6Professional staff$1,938$22629,848$57,848,4380.07%$57,848,4380.1%Non-certified staff$1,764$23429,848$52,660,7710.07%$52,660,7710.1%Non-personnel expenditures$246$4129,848$7,328,3720.01%$7,328,3720.0%Annualized Facilities Expenditures--non-class specialeducation school facilities4$440$2329,848$13,122,7410.02%$13,122,7410.0%Total special school administration and support$4,388$40229,848$130,960,3220.17%$130,960,3220.3%Regular Education SchoolAdministration and Support6Professional staff$506 $22 5,894,111 $2,982,491,7373.81%Non-certified staff$329 $13 5,894,111 $1,940,246,3582.48%Non-personnel expenditures$47 $5 5,894,111 $276,294,4220.35%Annualized Facilities Expendituresgenerated by Regular School Admin.4$794 $40 5,894,111 $4,682,115,3025.98%Total regular school administration and support$1,676$355,894,111$9,881,147,81912.63%Assessment Expenditures at the School Siteon Selected SpecialEducation Staff7Assessment on sp ed consulting tchr/psyc/cnslrs/soc wkrs $1265,923,959 $745,150,1020.95%$745,150,1021.5%Total Assessment$1265,923,959 $745,150,1020.95%$745,150,1021.5%Preschool Services in Schools Operated by Public School Districts8Preschool-Regular Education Instructional ServicesPreschool - Regular Teachers$2,009$283264,404$531,098,5360.68%Preschool - Other Teachers (e.g., Title I, ESL, GATE)$2,320 $931 46,738 $108,418,923Preschool - Regular Paraprofessional and aides$167$27256,354$42,777,5380.05%Preschool - Other Paraprofessional and aides$54 $13 33,081 $1,772,791Preschool Regular- Non-personnel expenditures$160$20290,599$46,521,4550.06%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Preschool Regular Classroom Teachers4$417 $43 256,354 $107,018,2710.14%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Other Preschool TeachersProviding Special Needs Programs (Title I, ESL, GATE)4$603 $134 34,358 $20,705,6720.03%Preschool-Special Education Instruction and Related ServicesPreschool - Special Teachers$4,107 $466 391,051 $1,606,236,6732.05%$1,606,236,6733.2%Preschool - Related service staff$3,389 $490 478,078 $1,620,327,8642.07%$1,620,327,8643.2%Preschool - Special Paraprofessional and aides $556 $99 377,150 $209,510,8830.27%$209,510,8830.4%Preschool - Non-personnel expenditures $666 $77 539,399 $359,503,3790.46%$359,503,3790.7%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by PreschoolSpecial Education Teachers4$835 $69 326,519 $272,624,2290.35%$272,624,2290.5%Annualized Facilities ExpendituresGenerated by Preschool ResourceSpecialist & Related Service Providers (pull out)4$203 $49 331,704 $67,482,2560.09%$67,482,2560.1%Total Preschool Services Operated by PublicSchool Districts $9,258 $740 539,399 $4,993,998,4626.38%$4,135,685,2848.3%Preschool Services in Operated in Non-public Schools9External preschool - Tuition and fees$7,797$1,14529,100$226,876,3390.29%$226,876,3390.5%External preschool - Related services provided by district$2,281$61716,147$36,837,8220.05%$36,837,8220.1%Total Preschool Services Operated by Non-public Schools$9,062$1,28329,100$ 263,714,1610.34%$263,714,1610.5%School-Aged Services in Schools Operated by Public School Districts8School-Aged-Regular Education Instructional ServicesSchool-aged - Regular Teachers$2,553 $135 4,141,909 $10,574,985,37013.51%School-aged - Other Teachers$1,940 $224 388,972 $754,595,561School-aged - Regular Paraprofessional and aides $191 $24 2,043,075 $389,900,8280.50%Spending ComponentsExpenditure perstudent served2Standard errorTotal estimatedpopulation ofspecial students inthis category2Total expenditures2Percent of the totalexpenditureTotal specialeducation spendingPercent of totalspecial educationexpenditureSchool-aged - Other Paraprofessional and aides $179 $46 259,723 $46,514,070School-aged Regular - Non-personnel expenditures $217 $13 4,237,203 $920,101,3191.18%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by School-Aged Regular Classroom Teachers4$242 $12 3,972,206 $959,365,3411.23%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by Other School-Aged Resource TeachersProviding Special Needs Programs (Title I, ESL, GATE)4$216 $56 352,169 $75,986,3870.10%School-Aged-Special EducationInstruction and Related Services0.0%School-aged - Special Teachers$3,765 $157 4,888,728 $18,404,998,58023.52%$18,404,998,58036.8%School-aged - Related service staff$3,143 $506 2,378,816 $7,476,420,5239.55%$7,476,420,52314.9%School-aged - Special Paraprofessional and aides$338 $28 4,884,156 $1,652,783,0462.11%$1,652,783,0463.3%School-aged - Non-personnel expenditures$196 $9 5,384,560 $1,055,862,1771.35%$1,055,862,1772.1%Annualized Facilities Expenditures Generated by School-Aged Special Education Teachers4$623 $45 2,555,968 $1,591,768,8762.03%$1,591,768,8763.2%Annualized Facilities ExpendituresGenerated by School-Aged ResourceSpecialist & Related Service Providers (pull out)4$143 $7 3,918,071 $560,069,1700.72%$560,069,1701.1%Total School-Aged$8,258 $231 5,384,560$44,463,515,65456.81%$30,741,902,37261.4%School-Aged Services in Operated in Non-public Schools or Other Public Agencies9External school-aged - Tuition and fees$25,568$2,369200,292$5,121,113,3946.54%$5,121,113,39410.2%External school-aged - Related services provided by the district$2,346$42074,376$174,514,4520.22%$174,514,4520.3%Total External School-Aged$26,440$2,341200,292$5,295,627,8466.77%$5,295,627,84610.6%Homebound and Hospital Programs10Homebound professional staff$1,91538,557$73,845,7290.09%$73,845,7290.1%Homebound non-certified staff$12838,557$4,923,4300.01%$4,923,4300.0%Homebound contracted personnel$19738,557$7,595,9080.01%$7,595,9080.0%Homebound non-personnel expenditures$29238,557$11,265,6530.01%$11,265,6530.0%Total Homebound$2,53238,557$97,630,7200.12%$97,630,7200.2%Summer Programs11Summer - Professional staff$881 $51 623,373 $549,400,0830.70%$549,400,0831.1%Summer - Non-certified staff$351 $19 623,373 $218,843,9360.28%$218,843,9360.4%Summer - Contracted personnel$51 $4 623,373 $32,097,9640.04%$32,097,9640.1%Summer - Non-personnel expenditures$23 $3 623,373 $14,497,7300.02%$14,497,7300.0%Total Summer School$1,307 $66 623,373$814,839,7141.04%$814,839,7141.6%Transportation Services12Special Transportation$4,418 $295 839,984 $3,710,889,8624.74%$3,710,889,8627.4%Regular Transportation$442 $17 1,125,345 $497,575,9930.64%Total Transportation Services$2,141 1,965,329$4,208,465,8555.38%$3,710,889,8627.4%TOTAL EXPENDITURES ON STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES $12,640 $335 6,191,908$78,260,724,897100.00%TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES ON STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES (excl facilities) $11,243 6,191,908$69,613,942,143TOTAL SPECIAL EDUCATION EXPENDITURES $8,080 6,191,908$50,031,164,911 $ 50,031,164,911100.00%TOTAL CURRENT SPECIAL EDUCATION EXPENDITURES (excl facilities) $7,654 6,191,908$47,394,717,506TOTAL EXPENDITURES ON PUBLIC ELEMENTARY & SECONARY EDUCATION$360,600,000,000Total expenditure to educate a student with a disability as percent of total spending21.7%Total special education spending as percent of total spending13.9%TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES ON PUBLIC ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION13$307,928,882,000Total current expenditure to educate a student withdisabilities as percent of total current spending22.6%Total current special education spending as percent of total current spending15.4%Total federal funds available to LEAs$605 6,191,908 $3,746,020,406Percent of Special Education Expenditures supported byfederal funds7.5%Percent of Current Special Education Expenditures (excl facilities) supported by federal funds7.9%RATIOS OF PER PUPIL EXPENDITURE TO EDUCATE A STUDENT WITH AND WITHOUT DISABILITIESRatio of total expenditure1.93Ratio of total current expenditure2.11Table B-2 Footnotes1Includes Title I, ESL, & GATE and uses same sample approach as Moore et al (1988) for calculating regular education expenditures.2Total expenditures divided by the number of students will not yield the per pupil expenditure that is shown due to rounding.3Special education central administration andsupport expenditures were estimated fromthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part II: Special Education.4Expenditures on facilities are estimated using data about the space requirements for different types of classroom and non-classroom buildings within districts, thecost per square foot of construction, and the average life expectancies of school buildings in different parts of the country.Square footage of different types ofclassrooms and the allocation of space in school buildings estimated from “The School Design Primer: A How-To Manual for the 21st Century.” Estimated costsper square foot for school construction derived from “Building for the Boom, 27th Annual Official Education Construction Report.” Average age of school buildingsderived from “How Old Are America’s Public Schools?” Data werecombined and annualized using standard present value calculations and a discount rate of 5%to reflect the relatively low interest rates in the current economy.5Regular education central administration andsupport expenditures were estimated fromthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part III: General Education.6Data were derived from existing state and district databasessolicited through the study, and supplemented with information from the questionnaires.7These only represent the expenditures on assessment, evaluation,and other IEP related activities that are not already accounted for in the total salaries ofteachers and related services personnel providing direct services to students with disabilities.8These expenditures are calculated from the Information Abouta Special Education Student survey, combined with information about teacher salaries andbenefits from the teacher questionnaires and extant data. Estimates of non-personnel expenditures are based on ratios of non-personnel to personnelexpenditures derived from the SEEPDistrict Questionnaires.9From questionnaires about students in non-public schools or publicinstitutions or agencies other than the public school district, excluding state special schools,for which the district pays tuitions or transfers funds.10Homebound and hospital program expenditures per pupil are estimated from the section 5 ofthe SEEP District Questionnaire, Part II-Special Education survey.Numbers of students served in homebound programs are derived from WESTAT data prepared for the 22nd annual report to Congress from the December 1,1999 counts of students.11Summer school per pupil expenditures are estimated from section 8 of theSEEP District Questionnaire, Part II: Special Education. Numbers of students servedin summer school programs are estimated from the SEEP student survey item that asks whether the child received summer school programs.12Transportation expenditures are estimated from the SEEP student survey item that askswhether the child received transportation services.13Total education expenditures are estimated from theDigest of Education Statistics, 2000, Table 163.NB: The figures in the 'Expenditure per student served' and 'Estimated total number of students served' columns have been rounded to the nearest decimal pointand whole number, respectively. The figures in the 'Totalexpenditure' column were computed including all decimals.Table B-3Total Expenditure for a Regular Education Studentwith No Special Needs Served in the U.S., 1999-2000(School-Aged)Education Spending ComponentsExpenditure per studentserved Standard errorRegular Education Central Office Administration and Support1Non class capitalization costs generated by regular district administration $48 $1Total regular central office administration and support$510 $15Regular Education SchoolAdministration and Support2Professional Staff$493 $16Non-certified staff$323 $11Non-personnel expenditures$50 $4Annualized Facilities Expenditures generated at the school3$806 $26Total regular school administration and support$866 $28Regular Education Instruction Services3School-aged - Regular Teachers$3,343 $92School-aged - Paraprofessional and aides$205 $14School-aged Regular – Non-personnel expenditures$273 $9Annualized Facilities Expendituresgenerated by classroomteachers $379 $20Total School-aged$4,083 $109Transportation Services4Regular Transportation$449 $16TOTAL EXPENDITURE FOR A REGULAR EDUCATION STUDENT WITH NO SPECIAL NEEDS $6,556TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURE FOR A REGULAR EDUCATION STUDENT WITH NO SPECIALNEEDS (excluding facilities)$5,325Sampling weight used: Student Regular Education Weights1Regular education central administration and support expenditures were estimated from the SEEP District Questionnaire, Part III:General Education.2Data were derived from existing stateand district databases solicited through the study, and supplemented with information fromthe questionnaires.3These expenditures are calculated from the Information Abouta Special Education Student survey, combined with informationabout teacher salaries and benefits from the teacher questionnaires and extant data. Estimates of non-personnel expenditures arebased on ratios of non-personnel topersonnel expenditures derived fromthe SEEP District Questionnaires.4Transportation expenditures are estimated from the SEEP student survey item that asks whether the child received transportationservices.

# Appendix C

Data Sources

Estimated data on individual students with di sabilities and the services they receive are the centerpiece of the SEEP analysis. The st udent database provides detailed information on the personnel expenditures (i.e., salaries and benefits) necessary to provide direct special and regular education se rvices to students with disabilities. Overall averages for non-personnel expenditures are es timated from the general fiscal information provided by the directors of special educa tion in the sample districts. 28



### Per pupil expenditures on central office admi nistration and support of special education programs, homebound and hospital programs, and summer school programs are derived from data obtained directly from the directors of special education in the sample districts. Per pupil estimates of expenditures on re gular school administration and personnel support are based primarily on da ta obtained about individual sample schools attended by the sample students. Estimates of expenditu res on regular district administration and support and related non-personne l expenditures for regular school administration and support and for regular instructional expenditu res at the school leve l are based on data

derived from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 29



### Expenditures on facilities are es timated using data from a variety of sources about the space requirements for different types of cl assroom and non-classroom buildings within districts, the cost per square foot of constr uction, and the average ag es of school buildings in different parts of the country. 30

28 It was not possible within the scope of this study to estimate non-personnel expenditures associated with specific disability categories.

29 National Center for Education Statistics: http://n ces.ed.gov/ccd/stfis.html. Public Elementary and Secondary School Revenues and Current Expenditures, by State, Fiscal Year 1998 (IMPUTED FILE). SEEP applied the ratios of non-personnel expenditures to expenditures on instructional salaries, and benefit dollars were estimated from columns [(the sum of columns e16 through e18) divided by the sum of columns e11 through e12)] to instructional personnel expenditure data derived from the SEEP datacollection to estimate non-personnel expenditures for instruction. Similarly, SEEP applied the ratios of nonpersonnel expenditures to expenditures on school administration salaries and benefits [(the sum of columns e265, e255, e245, and e235) all divided by the sum of columns e225 and e215] to school administration personnel expenditures derived from SEEP data collection.

30 Square footage of different types of classrooms and the allocation of space in school buildings estimated from “The School Design Primer: A How-To Manual for the 21 st Century.” Estimated costs per square foot for school construction derived from “Building for the Boom, 27 th Annual Official Education Construction Report.” Average age of school buildings derived from “How Old Are America’s Public Schools?” Data were combined and annualized using standard present value calculations and a discount rate of 5% to reflect the relatively low interest rates in the current economy.