Foreward

Chapter 602 of the Laws of 1994 added Section 215-b to the Education Law to require the Commissioner of Education to prepare and submit to the Governor, the President Pro Tem of the Senate, and the Speaker of the Assembly, an annual report beginning January 1, 1996.  The report is also to be provided to all school districts and Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES).

The report details certain financial and statistical outcomes of BOCES, tuition costs for selected programs, per pupil cost information, and aggregate expenditure data for BOCES administrative, capital and service functions.  In accordance with the statute, the report is to include changes from the year prior to the report year for all data.  Therefore, data will be reported here for the 2003-04 year and for the prior year, 2002-03. The expenditure data are for costs incurred by the BOCES for the 2002-03 school year as the prior year and for the 2003-04 school year as the current year.  The estimate for aid is based upon the cost of services and administration for 2002-03 and for 2003-04; the estimate for aid for the cost of capital operations is based on the 2003-04 and the 2004-2005 school year.  Most aids are paid the year following the expenditure, but aid on capital operations is current. 

All school districts that have joined a BOCES are required to pay for the costs of the central administration of the BOCES and the cost of the capital operations.  In accordance with Education Law, the costs of both functions are allocated on the basis of either the Resident Weighted Average Daily Attendance (RWADA) of each district or the true valuation of the property of each.  Beginning with the 1997-98 school year, BOCES may also use resident pupil enrollment as the basis for cost.   A single method must be used by all districts in a particular BOCES.  Currently, all BOCES except one use the RWADA method of allocating costs.  Therefore, in this report the administrative and capital charges are reported based on RWADA for all BOCES.

Districts in a BOCES make their final decision about participation in services in the spring preceding each school year.  The costs of services are determined by the number of students each district elects to send to a program, or by the amount of time a district purchases in some other programs.  Therefore, in this report some services are reported based upon tuition, while others are reported on an hourly basis or on the basis of a full-time equivalent (FTE) of staff time.

This is the tenth year of the annual report by the Commissioner of Education on BOCES.  Comments would be welcome about the usefulness of the report, as well as ways in which the report might be improved.  Comments should be addressed to Jeanette Canaday, Supervisor, Educational Management/Grants Management Services, New York State Education Department, Education Building Annex, Room 876, Albany, New York  12234.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSES OF BOARDS OF COOPERATIVE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES

Introduction

The tradition of Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) is rooted in the organizational history of school districts in New York State. The three-part public education system which has evolved in New York is comprised of the local school district, the regional Supervisory District and BOCES, and the State Education Department.

Supervisory Districts

In 1910, the State Legislature adopted a statute to improve overall supervision of the State's schools.  The Commissioner of Education was authorized to divide the territory of the State outside cities and villages of 4,500 or more people into Supervisory Districts, with approximately 50 schools in each.  The person in charge of this territorial jurisdiction was given the title "District Superintendent."  At that time, 208 Supervisory Districts were created.  District Superintendents were deemed to be State officials with their salary paid by the State.

Groups with a concern about the range of educational services provided to rural children began their initial efforts to construct an intermediate unit or regional service agency to support local district services in the 1930s.  While the Supervisory District structure instituted in 1910 provided an excellent means to improve supervision of local schools, there was no authority for a Supervisory District to provide educational services.

In 1933, the Legislature adopted a statute to reduce and consolidate the number of Supervisory Districts.  Thereafter, whenever there was a vacancy in the Office of District Superintendent, the Commissioner of Education was required to determine if the educational interests of the area could be adequately served by combining the vacant office with an adjacent Supervisory District.  This led to a reduction in the number of Supervisory Districts to 183 at the time of the formation of the Council on Rural Education in 1943.

Need for Regional Services

By the end of World War II, it became clear that a regional educational delivery system was needed to provide educational services to students in rural areas.  While school district reorganization had greatly reduced the number of small common schools, by the early 1940s there were still over 4,000 small schools.  Many of the central schools serving rural students in K-12 districts lacked sufficient enrollments and fiscal resources to provide the variety of programs available to students in the city districts and emerging suburban schools.  The New York State Farm Bureau and other agricultural groups with an interest in gaining equal educational opportunity for rural students, banded together to establish the Council on Rural Education in 1943.  The purpose of the Council was to develop a mechanism to provide services in the rural areas and to encourage the Legislature and Governor to adopt any necessary legislation.

The structure preferred by many was an intermediate school district with independent taxing authority.  Some proposed, however, that the Supervisory District and the District Superintendency be reconfigured to provide regional services.  The duties of the District Superintendent as supervisor of the local schools had diminished as local schools consolidated and as their administrators received more training.  Better roads reduced the time which was needed to get from one school to another.  District Superintendents were also well-known locally.  To some, it seemed that a regional service agency structure could be combined with the existing Supervisory District structure. 

Intermediate Districts

In March 1948, the Legislature considered the creation of intermediate districts.  At the time, there were 181 Supervisory Districts; the proposal before the Legislature called for only 65 "intermediate units."  The proposal called for financing in three ways:

• payments from participating districts,
• State Aid, and
• a local property tax.

The Legislature proposed that intermediate school districts could be created as central districts were created:  by voter approval.  This would be a time consuming and arduous process.

Legislation Enacted

In April 1948, an intermediate school district bill was signed into law.  It included a section to authorize the establishment of "a board of cooperative educational services for the purpose of carrying out a program of shared educational services in the schools of the supervisory district."  Eleven Cooperative Boards were formed in the next ten months.  No intermediate district was ever established; the statute for their creation was repealed in 1972.

Cooperative Boards

To form a Cooperative Board, the boards of education of a group of school districts in an area could vote to request the Commissioner of Education to approve the establishment of a Cooperative Board to provide shared services in a Supervisory District area.  Each Cooperative Board would have five members elected by the local school district boards of education.  The District Superintendent of the Supervisory District would, as a second job, serve as the chief executive officer of the Cooperative Board and receive a salary for these responsibilities from the participating school districts.

In their first decade, the services of the Cooperative Board were quite limited -- largely shared itinerant special teachers for rural districts with too few students to employ a full-time person:  art and music teachers, nurses, and driver education instructors.  State Aid was received by the participating districts to partially reimburse costs for services approved by the Commissioner.  Districts only paid for the services they requested each year, but all member districts paid a proportionate share of the cost of the District Superintendent's office and central administrative costs.  All districts also paid a proportionate cost of the rent for the offices of the District Superintendent, since the Cooperative Board had no authority under statute to construct or own buildings.  State Aid was paid to the districts in the following year for all administrative costs and the costs of services.  The amount of aid each district received varied according to district wealth, with the less wealthy districts receiving a greater share.

Refinement and Growth

By 1954, 51 BOCES had been approved for establishment by the Commissioner.  While membership had originally been limited to central and small union free school districts within a Supervisory District, the larger, independent districts were allowed to join BOCES in 1955, thus ensuring additional growth.  School districts in small cities were permitted to join a BOCES in 1963.

By 1960, the number of Supervisory Districts had been reduced to 91, and 82 BOCES had been created.  The nature of the services provided began to change, broadening from the simple shared teacher of the 1950s.  Educational communications, services for students with disabilities, and career and technical education services were developed.  However, the inability of a BOCES to own facilities was a limiting factor, especially for services such as career and technical and special education, in which groups of students from a variety of schools were brought together at a single location for educational programs that were too costly for individual districts to operate locally.

This problem was remedied in 1967 when legislation was adopted which permitted a BOCES to construct and own facilities following voter approval by district residents.  It also permitted a BOCES to use the Dormitory Authority, a State agency, to finance the cost of the facilities.  From this point on, BOCES services expanded in many directions.  Most of the BOCES constructed buildings and equipped classrooms and shops with state-of-the-art equipment.  Legislation was adopted to authorize BOCES to provide data processing services for schools on a multi-BOCES basis.  Computer assisted instructional services also began to be requested, as well as planning and staff development services, and a number of programs for adults.  Throughout the 1970s, BOCES services continued to grow, especially in the instructional support and management areas.  BOCES became an integral part of the State's public education system.  Most of the school districts in the State were component members of a BOCES by 1980.  In 1983, BOCES authority to provide shared services was expanded to include academic programs.  Prior to this time, BOCES were not allowed to operate programs such as a summer school, alternative high school or other central academic services.

Current Status

Today there are 38 Supervisory Districts in the State and a BOCES is located in each.  All but 9 of the 698 operating school districts in New York are members of a BOCES.  Of the 9, 4 are eligible to become members of BOCES; the 5 city districts, each with a population over 125,000, are not eligible to join a BOCES.  The 38 BOCES served a total of 1,630,671 students in the 2003-2004 school year. Total general fund expenditures amounted to approximately $2,085,495,254.

The individual BOCES vary in size significantly, with those located in rural areas serving fewer districts and smaller numbers of students, but encompassing a larger territory than those in suburban locations.  The BOCES serving the largest number of students (209,055 students) is Nassau BOCES on Long Island, while the BOCES with the smallest enrollment base is Franklin-Essex-Hamilton BOCES on the Canadian border (9,448 students).  The BOCES with the largest number of districts is also Nassau with 56; the smallest is Schuyler-Chemung-Tioga in the Southern Tier with 7.  The BOCES with the largest territory is Jefferson-Lewis-Hamilton-Herkimer-Oneida in the North Country with 3,339 square miles; the smallest is Westchester, adjacent to New York City, with 184 square miles[1]. 

Programs and services also vary, reflecting the local needs of each area.  All the BOCES operate programs in six service categories: career and technical education; special education; itinerant services; general education; instructional support and non-instructional support.  The array of programs in each category differs, however, reflecting the services requested by the local districts.  Nassau BOCES, for example, operates a very small itinerant program, as does Westchester.  This is because most of the school districts in both BOCES are quite large and have sufficient students to preclude the need for part-time staff through BOCES.  Generally, itinerant expenditures are inversely proportional to the enrollment base of the BOCES; the smaller the student base, the more likely it is that districts will request shared personnel through BOCES.  In another service category, the reverse is true.  In general education, BOCES serving primarily the larger suburban districts have bigger budgets for general education since these districts use more services, such as arts and environmental education and enrichment services for the academically talented.  Another example of the variety across BOCES is in the area of instructional and administrative computer services.  These services are regionalized in many areas of the State.  Generally, certain BOCES serve districts in other BOCES, as well as their own.  In a few instances, a BOCES has developed a service to which districts in many BOCES subscribe.  The Rensselaer-Columbia-Greene BOCES operates a State Aid Planning Service to which hundreds of districts subscribe.  The Erie I BOCES operates a policy development service which also serves many districts in other BOCES.

From 1948 to the present, the array of services provided by BOCES has increased.  BOCES provide programs for their component districts to supplement district programs. They equalize educational opportunities for all students by permitting districts to take part in shared services.  They provide programs for adult residents.  They provide programs on behalf of both the federal and State governments.  While many states now also have regional service agencies, few provide the breadth and variety of services which are the norm in the BOCES of New York State.

SUMMARY OF GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES

The following pages summarize the 2002-03 and 2003-04 school year expenditures of the 38 BOCES.  Expenditures are, by statute, divided into three categories:  Administration, Capital, and Service. The administration category includes expenditures for the Office of District Superintendent, Assistant Superintendents with central office responsibilities, and expenditures for certain operational functions, including the business office and personnel.  The capital expenditure consists of costs for maintenance and renovation of owned facilities, and rental of leased facilities.  The service category, representing the largest expenditure, consists of all of the shared programs requested by component school districts to supplement and enhance district programs.  Successive charts provide greater detail about the costs for the administration and capital budgets, the kinds of shared programs included in the service category, the State Aid provided to districts as partial reimbursement of the cost of BOCES services and cost data for selected BOCES services.

 

SUMMARY OF AUDITED GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BY BOCES AND STATE TOTALS:  2002-03
BOCES	TOTAL ADMIN EXPENSE	TOTAL SERVICE EXPENSE	TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENSE	GRAND TOTAL EXPENSE
ALBANY	$3,911,938	$64,181,435	$1,860,803	$69,954,176
BROOME	2,020,655	48,351,316	742,150	51,114,121
CATTARAUGUS	2,068,538	38,087,374	1,590,493	41,746,405
CAYUGA	835,104	15,683,481	330,683	16,849,268
CLINTON	1,129,657	20,778,895	565,867	22,474,419
DELAWARE-CHENANGO	1,531,512	23,590,296	601,755	25,723,563
DUTCHESS	2,281,378	38,802,214	1,654,735	42,738,327
ERIE I	2,196,616	89,709,658	1,682,305	93,588,579
ERIE II	2,192,223	50,421,804	1,457,459	54,071,486
FRANKLIN	1,193,889	17,108,171	311,753	18,613,813
GENESEE	1,763,627	31,210,848	1,144,511	34,118,986
HAMILTON-FULTON	888,288	16,115,672	415,174	17,419,134
HERKIMER	1,149,472	14,590,953	217,135	15,957,560
JEFFERSON-LEWIS	1,648,840	33,294,349	399,867	35,343,056
MADISON-ONEIDA	1,209,564	38,001,015	2,755,425	41,966,004
MONROE I	3,529,203	81,282,995	2,667,974	87,480,172
MONROE II	2,387,338	48,490,376	1,774,440	52,652,154
NASSAU	13,762,001	168,748,251	10,442,221	192,952,473
ONEIDA	1,573,283	25,172,995	795,062	27,541,340
ONONDAGA-CORTLAND	2,199,125	52,109,919	1,342,133	55,651,177
ONTARIO	2,336,769	64,944,646	1,727,540	69,008,955
ORANGE	2,599,131	66,785,313	965,152	70,349,596
ORLEANS-NIAGARA	1,648,285	41,222,125	816,865	43,687,275
OSWEGO	2,108,498	33,451,005	1,012,58	36,572,041
OTSEGO	1,193,645	17,885,863	441,260	19,520,768
PUTNAM-WESTCHESTER	4,139,663	56,972,366	194,994	61,307,023
RENSSELAER-COLUMBIA	2,661,396	25,924,558	1,269,197	29,855,151
ROCKLAND	3,096,404	52,628,986	1,087,213	56,812,603
SCHUYLER-CHEMUNG	2,834,923	29,880,618	1,244,245	33,959,786
ST LAWRENCE	1,166,840	33,685,369	596,205	35,448,414
STEUBEN-ALLEGANY	1,917,757	20,410,754	1,105,370	23,433,881
SUFFOLK I	13,043,556	221,753,274	5,177,231	239,974,061
SUFFOLK II	6,328,158	93,799,022	3,724,224	103,851,404
SULLIVAN	1,176,211	16,613,214	1,495,091	19,284,516
TOMPKINS-SENECA-TIOGA	1,520,073	15,953,060	329,903	17,803,036
ULSTER	1,566,183	31,047,926	762,885	33,376,994
WASHINGTON-SARATOGA	2,831,235	42,034,225	1,050,239	45,915,699
WESTCHESTER