A majority of the schools across the region are spending less on educating students than what’s needed to ensure the state’s rigorous academic standards are met.

That’s the word from the Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children, which released a report this week on the spending impact on rural school performance.

Eight of 14 schools in McKean, Elk, Potter and Cameron counties didn’t meet the grades for adequate education funding. Around the state, 202 rural districts are not receiving their fair share of state funding, which is forcing them to spend less and risk student achievement or raising taxes, the organization states in its report.

“This information highlights how inequitable funding is across the state,” St. Marys Area School District’s superintendent, Dr. Brian Toth, told The Era on Friday. “It is impossible for us to make up a 21 percent deficit of the adequacy target without the state committing to Fair Funding. Research shows that funding for schools to increase student achievement does make a difference.”

Across McKean County, Bradford Area School District’s adequacy target is $25,108,087, and the district’s spending is 9.4 percent below that target. Kane Area’s district adequacy target is $13,085,135, but falls 13.3 percent below the target; Otto‐Eldred has a $7,669,734 district adequacy target and is 20.4 percent below; Port Allegany, a $9,847,272 district adequacy target and 10.2 percent below; and Smethport Area, a $10,193,802 district adequacy target and 7.5 percent below.

In Elk County, the St. Marys Area School District’s district adequacy target is $21,090,925, and the district’s spending is 21.8 percent below the target; Ridgway Area, $9,361,968 district adequacy target, 5.3 percent below the target; and Johnsonburg Area, $6,987,471 district adequacy target, 8.4 percent above.

In Potter County, the Austin Area School District’s district adequacy target is $1,984,152 and the school has met 59.4 percent above the target; Coudersport Area, $8,656,642 district adequacy target and 9.9 percent below target; Galeton Area, $4,354,560 district adequacy target and 13.8 above the target; Northern Potter, $6,360,313 district adequacy target and 1.2 percent above the target; and Oswayo Valley, $5,126,966 district adequacy target and 0.2 percent above the target.

Meanwhile, Cameron County has a $7,575,954 district adequacy target and is 4.1 percent above the target.

But Galeton Area School District Superintendent Alanna Huck said she disagrees with some of the figures presented, adding that she doesn’t believe that some of the districts listed as needing to spend more to meet the adequacy target is correct.

“The report is silent on the issues of rising healthcare costs, pension costs and cyber charter school costs,” she said. “If those three areas could be brought into better control, I believe we would have more money to spend on academics.”

The report revealed that more than a third of third-graders attending rural school districts scored below proficient on the English language arts Pennsylvania System of School Assessment, and two-thirds of students who go to rural districts scored below proficient in the eighth-grade mathematics PSSA.

In rural school districts spending between 10 percent and 25 percent below the adequacy target, nearly 40 percent of students were not proficient on the third-grade English language arts and nearly 70 percent of students were not proficient in eighth-grade math PSSAs.

In school districts spending between 25 percent to 50 percent below their adequacy target, 45 percent of third-grade students were not proficient as measured by the ELA PSSA, and 80 percent were not proficient in eighth-grade math.

“I would also argue that the report focuses a great deal on success being measured on test scores alone and I have gone on record in the past to state that success is not measured by test scores alone,” Huck said.

But an official with the Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children disagrees, at least in part, with Huck’s sentiments.

“State assessment scores are not the only measure of student achievement, but student performance in rural school districts should be of great concern to policymakers, parents and communities,” said Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children President and CEO Joan Benso. “We have made great strides over the last two years with basic education funding increases and the new fair funding formula, but the amount of resources provided to schools remains inadequate.”

All in all, St. Marys’ Toth called a boost in state funding a “drop in the bucket” in comparison to mandated costs and and their associated increases.

“Education is very people-intensive to operate and people cost money,” he said. “We must treat our employees as professionals and provide professional salaries and benefits. It is the educational staff who alone can and will provide quality education.”

In its report, the Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children states that adequate resources in schools help maintain small classes so that teachers can have more one-on-one time with students, particularly when students are struggling.

“The lack of funding, the possible cut to transportation subsidy and the possible cut to real estate taxes is not making it easy for any district to make ends meet,” Huck said. “I worry a great deal about how local school districts will continue into the future.”