Supporting Effective Teaching in Tennessee: Executive Summary | Page 22

the BEP is a very complex formula that can best be described
in four steps. First, the formula calculates the educational
inputs each district needs to provide an adequate education
for its students. For example, each district gets one teaching
position for every 20 students in grades K-3 and one social
worker for every 2,500 students in grade K-12 (see Figure
3.9). Second, the state estimates the cost of each input. For
instance, the current formula assumes each teaching position
costs $38,000 and that each district needs $69.44 per pupil
for textbooks. Third, the state determines the average share of
each expense it will pay. Currently, the state pays on average
70 percent of instructional expenses, 75 percent of classroom
expenses, and 50 percent of non-classroom expenses. Finally,
the state decides what proportion of these expenses it will pay
for each district based on the district’s ability to provide local
funding from both property and sales taxes. For example,
while the state only provides 28.3 percent of Franklin Special
School District’s total funding, the state provides 77.2 percent
of Alamo City’s total funding. The state provides lump-sum
payments to each district for the entire amount the district is
owed under BEP.
In 2007, BEP 2.0 was passed into law as Public Chapter 369.
BEP 2.0 both revised the original BEP funding formula and

infused approximately $205 million new dollars into K-12
education. Specifically, BEP 2.0 increased funding for both atrisk students and English language learners. It also increased
the average state share of funding for instructional expenses
from 65 percent to 70 percent, with the intention of raising the
state’s share to 75 percent once BEP 2.0 is “fully funded.” The
formula also decreased by 50 percent the cost differential factor,
which was initially created in 1992 to compensate systems in
higher wage markets for the higher salaries they had to pay
teachers. However, this factor was deemed to be somewhat
outdated when it was revisited in 2007.
To ensure the BEP stays up-to-date, the state has created a BEP
Review Committee, which meets annually to make both shortand long-term recommendations for improving the BEP. For
example, the 2008 BEP Review Committee report recommended
a continued phase-in of Public Chapter 369’s BEP 2.0 funding;
providing additional funding for assistant principals, nurses,
and technology coordinators; increasing the funding for teacher
materials and supplies by $100; and adding a new BEP component
to fund professional development and mentoring. Over the longterm, the BEP committee recommended increasing the pay for
teachers, principals, and assistant principals to the Southeastern
average for each position.

Figure 3.9

Selected BEP Components and Funding Levels
Non-Instructional Positions Funding Level
Principals

Assistant Principals Elementary

Assistant Principals Secondary

System-Wide Instructional Supervisors

Special Education Supervisors
Vocational Education Supervisors
Special Education Assessment Personnel
Social Workers
Psychologists

.5 per school < 225
1 per school > 225
Requirements for Students Entering
.5 per school 660-879
High School in 2009 or After
1 per school 880-1,099
1.5 per school 1,100-1,319
2 per school > 1,320
.5 per school 300-649
1 per school 650-999
1.5 per school 1,000-1,249
2 per school > 1,250
(+ 1 per add’l 250)
1 per < 500 to tal ADM
2 per 500-999 total ADM
3 per 1,000-1,999 total ADM
3 per > 2,000 total ADM (+ 1 per add’l 1,000)
1 per 750 special education I & S
1 per 1,000 vocational education FTEADM
1 per 600 special education I & S
1 per 2,000 total ADM
1 per 2,500 total ADM

Source: Tennessee Department of Education

21