Audit suggests closer scrutiny of $79 million for integration

11/18/2005

BY MEGAN BOLDT
Pioneer Press

A Minnesota program that gives some school districts money to promote integration lacks focus and oversight and needs to be retooled, a legislative auditor’s report released Thursday found.

The report questions whether buying computers and history books with integration funds — which some districts have done — promotes diversity and desegregation. The report also found that districts with a higher percentage of minority students or greater integration needs don’t always get more funding.

“We’re not saying bad things are going on,” Legislative Auditor Jim Nobles said. “We’re just not sure of the purpose.”

Eighty of Minnesota’s 341 school districts receive a total of $79 million in integration funding, a program the Legislature started in 1997. The effort is the state’s latest strategy to promote voluntary efforts to encourage desegregation. The biggest recipients are the Minneapolis and St. Paul districts, each of which receives about $21 million.

Judy Randall, the report’s project manager, said the funding formula could be out of whack because it’s based on a district’s total student population. That means a smaller district with greater integration challenges can receive less money than a larger district with fewer challenges.

For example, the Stillwater school district received almost $1 million in integration funds during the 2004-05 school year. About 5 percent of its students are minorities. But Brooklyn Center, with a 66 percent minority enrollment, got $250,000.

Stillwater is getting $2,211 for every minority student, Randall said, in stark comparison to Brooklyn Center’s $223.

The report also found that the integration program’s purpose is unclear, giving school districts significant flexibility in how they spend their money. Some districts use it for interdistrict magnet schools, multicultural festivals, diversity training, or classroom partnerships with other districts.

Others spend the money on purposes the report’s authors found more questionable, such as paying for services to English language learners or reducing class sizes.

“Every strapped school district in this state would like to reduce class sizes,” said Rep. Mindy Greiling, DFL-Roseville. “But is that really doing anything for racial integration?”

Randall said the bottom line is that there are no guidelines.

“Frankly, school districts can justify any educational spending,” Randall said. “And I’ve heard justifications for practically anything.”

The Minnesota Department of Education also was criticized for its lack of consistent oversight of the program. For example, it doesn’t approve integration budgets for Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth. And it hasn’t regularly evaluated the success of integration programs.

The legislative auditor’s report recommends that state lawmakers clarify the program’s purpose and change the funding formula so it more accurately represents school districts’ needs. One option could be basing a district’s funding on the number of minority students enrolled, Nobles said, instead of the total pupil population.

Morgan Brown, the education department’s director of school choice and innovation, said the agency agrees with the recommendations and is happy to work with state lawmakers on legislation, especially if it clearly defines the purpose of the program.

“If that can be accomplished, it will allow for greater success,” he said.