| TABLE 1 | ("RESULTS OF OPERATIONS") | ||||
| Number and | Percentage of Districts with Surpluses and Deficits - FY 96 - FY 00 | ||||
| (Combined | Educational, Operations and Maintenance, and Transportation Funds) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | # Deficit Spending | % Deficit Spending | # Surplus Revenue | % Surplus Revenue | # District Total |
| 1996 | 370 | 40.8% | 537 | 59.2% | 907 |
| 1997 | 386 | 42.7% | 519 | 57.3% | 905 |
| 1998 | 281 | 31.3% | 616 | 68.7% | 897 |
| 1999 | 361 | 40.4% | 533 | 59.6% | 894 |
| 2000 | 354 | 39.6% | 541 | 60.4% | 895 |
| Table 1 shows historical data covering five years for “results of operations” in the three “operating” funds— | |||||
| Educational, Operations & Maintenance and Transportation. For the five-year period, deficit spending | |||||
| ranged from a low of 31.3% of districts in 1998 to a high of 42.7% in 1997. During the most recent year — | |||||
| FY 2000—354 of the 895 school districts had expenditures in excess of revenues in the “operating” funds. | |||||
| TABLE 2 | (FUND BALANCES) | ||||
| Number and Percentage of Districts with Surpluses and Deficits in Fund Balances - FY 96 - FY 00 | |||||
| (Combined | Educational, Operations and Maintenance, and Transportation Funds) | ||||
| Fiscal Year | # With Fund Balance Deficit | % With Fund Balance Deficit | # With Fund Balance Surplus | % With Fund Balance Surplus | # Districts Total |
| 1996 | 72 | 7.9% | 835 | 92.1% | 907 |
| 1997 | 66 | 7.3% | 839 | 92.7% | 905 |
| 1998 | 45 | 5.0% | 852 | 95.0% | 897 |
| 1999 | 39 | 4.4% | 855 | 95.6% | 894 |
| 2000 | 40 | 4.5% | 855 | 95.5% | 895 |
| Table 2 shows the number and percentage of districts that reported surpluses and/or deficits in the fund | |||||
| balances (cash/savings on hand) in the “operating” funds as of June 30 in the reporting years 1996-2000. | |||||
| These data show a significant improvement over time; in 1996, 72 of the 907 school districts (7.9%) had | |||||
| negative fund balances versus 40 of 895 school districts (4.5%) in 2000. Districts having a fund balance | |||||
| surplus were able to utilize savings/reserves and/or the Working Cash fund to fund ongoing operations. | |||||
| These districts did not utilize external borrowing to fund ongoing operations. | |||||
| TABLE 3 | (EXTERNAL BORROWING TO FUND ONGOING OPERATIONS) | ||||
| Number and Percentage of Districts with Fund Balance Deficit | |||||
| Not Covered by Working Cash | |||||
| Fiscal Year | # With Fund Balance Deficit | % With Fund Balance Deficit | # Districts | ||
| 1996 | 30 | 3.3% | 907 | ||
| 1997 | 26 | 2.9% | 905 | ||
| 1998 | 12 | 1.3% | 897 | ||
| 1999 | 12 | 1.3% | 894 | ||
| 2000 | 15 | 1.7% | 895 | ||
| Table 3 shows the number and percentage of districts that had to rely on external borrowing over the five- | |||||
| year period to fund ongoing operations as reported in the three “operating” funds. Once again, there was a | |||||
| significant improvement over time from 30 districts in 1996 (3.3%) to 15 districts (1.7%) in 2000. | |||||