Cranberry Area School District
Serving Our Students.
Sustaining Our District.
Sustaining Our District.
Understanding the Path Forward
A transparent look at CASD's budget landscape — what's driving costs, how we compare to peers, and what our options are for long-term sustainability.
2026–27 Budget
Peer Benchmarking
State Funding Formula
Long-Term Strategy
1
Budget Reality
The Gap — What the Numbers Show
Total projected expenses: $25.66M | Revenue depends on tax decision
Option 1 — No Tax Increase
0%
Revenue stays at $24.82M
Shortfall: $832,998
Option 2 — Within Index (2.4%)
2.4%
Revenue rises to ~$25.01M
Shortfall: $649,298
Option 3 — Maximum Index (4.8%)
4.8%
Revenue rises to ~$25.19M
Shortfall: $466,396
Even with no tax increase, the district must identify $832,998 in reductions. Taxes alone cannot close this gap — operational alignment is also required.
Total Budget
$25.66M
FY 2026–27
Projected Revenue
$24.82M
Selected scenario
Structural Gap
$833K
Must be addressed
Fund Balance
$3.47M
As of 6/30/2025 — finite reserve
2
Peer Benchmarking
How CASD Compares to Similar Districts
Venango County peer group — same region, comparable size
Operating Cost / ADM
$18,692 LOWEST
Up to $4,136 less per ADM than peers — CASD has the lowest operating cost per ADM of any peer district
State Funding / ADM
$6,716 LOWEST
Every peer district receives more state aid per ADM than CASD
Federal Revenue / ADM
Lowest LOWEST
Lower poverty rate means less federal Title I aid per ADM than all peer districts
Poverty Rate vs. Millage
13.9% poverty
Lowest poverty rate in peer group — yet carries near-average millage of 16.63
3
State Funding Formula
Why Does CASD Receive Less State Funding?
Pennsylvania's formula is designed — not by accident — to account for local ability to pay
1
The Core Formula
How the state calculates aid
2
Student Need Weighting
Poverty, special ed, ELL
3
Local Capacity Index
Property value + income
4
The CASD Result
What this means for us
Pennsylvania gives more aid where need is higher and local capacity is lower
The Basic Education Funding (BEF) formula has two primary inputs: how many students a district has (weighted by need), and how much ability the local community has to fund education on its own.
The formula's core logic: Higher local wealth → lower state subsidy. Pennsylvania expects wealthier communities to contribute more locally. All calculations are based on Weighted Average Daily Membership (WADM).
PA BEF Pool (Gov. Proposed)
$375M
CASD Proposed Share
$229,102
Based On
WADM
Students are weighted by factors that increase funding need
The formula adds weight to each student based on economic disadvantage, special education status, English language learners, and concentrated poverty. CASD's ADM generates fewer additional weights than poorer peers.
CASD's poverty rate among school-age children is 13.9% — meaningfully lower than Oil City (21.9%) and Titusville (27.2%). Fewer weighted students means a smaller state allocation.
CASD Poverty Rate
13.9%
Oil City Poverty
21.9%
Titusville Poverty
27.2%
Showing highest-contrast peer examples. Full five-district comparison available on Slide 2.
Local Capacity Index measures what your community can raise on its own
The index combines assessed property value per ADM and median household income. A higher index signals greater local taxpayer capacity — and triggers a lower state subsidy. CASD's assessed value base is stronger than most peers.
CASD's assessed value per ADM is $7,529 — the highest in the peer group. This tells the state: Cranberry taxpayers can support more of the cost locally.
CASD AV/Student
$7,529
Oil City AV/Student
$3,829
Titusville AV/Student
$4,531
Showing highest-contrast peer examples. Full five-district comparison available on Slide 2.
The result: CASD carries more of its own weight — by design
CASD is not being shortchanged arbitrarily. The formula recognizes that Cranberry's property base and income levels give local taxpayers more capacity than Venango County peers. The consequence is a structural reliance on local revenue that exceeds every comparison district.
CASD receives $6,716 in state funding per ADM — the lowest of any peer. This is the direct result of CASD's stronger local capacity index. The gap will not close without either a formula change or a policy response.
CASD State $/Student
$6,716
Peer Average
$8,725
Gap vs. Peers
−$2,009
Peer average includes Franklin, Oil City, Titusville, and Valley Grove. Full breakdown on Slide 2.
4
Long-Term Sustainability
Staffing, Enrollment & Operational Alignment
~66% of CASD expenses are personnel — enrollment trends create structural pressure over time
Enrollment Decline (4 yr)
−1.8%
Personnel Share of Budget
66.4%
Millage 2024-25
15.7649 +3.65% vs index
Millage 2025-26
16.63 +4.41% — at index
Oct 2025 Enrollment
1,142
Kindergarten (2025)
70 2025-26
Cyber Charter Students
K-12 Enrollment
Total Expenses
Millage Rate
Key Governance Insight
When enrollment falls but staffing stays flat, the cost-per-student rises automatically — even with no new spending. This is not a spending problem; it is a structural efficiency challenge requiring gradual, planned alignment.
Alignment Pathways
Natural Attrition
Allow retirements and voluntary departures to reduce headcount gradually without disruption. Requires multi-year planning and forward visibility on retirement eligibility.
Program Utilization Review
Active
Evaluate programs with low enrollment or high cost-per-participant. Redirect resources toward high-demand, high-impact offerings. Includes electives, extracurriculars, and course sections.
Operational Efficiency
Review transportation routing, energy contracts, vendor relationships, and administrative overhead for savings opportunities that do not affect student-facing services.
Charter School Monitoring
Cyber charter enrollment has remained elevated since the COVID era — ranging from 41–53 students annually in recent years (2025-26: 52 students). At approximately $898,000 per year in tuition costs, this is a significant and largely uncontrollable expense. Improving in-district programming options may reduce enrollment over time.
The Strategic Frame
"Operational alignment" — not cuts. Planned, phased, and driven by data rather than crisis.
5
Path Forward
Scenario Planner: The Path to Sustainability
Adjust both levers to see how tax strategy and expense alignment change the 5-year trajectory.
①
Annual Tax Increase
Applied each year through 2030-31
Current millage
16.63 mills
②
Annual Expense Growth
Baseline inflation — medical, contracts, staffing
Current expenses
$25.66M
③ Annual Savings Commitment
Applied on top of inflation rate — reduces expense line each year
Break-even needs
calculating…
2030-31 Projection
Projected Revenue
$24.58M
at 0% annual increase
Projected Expenses
$30.01M
at 4% growth, $0 savings
Resulting Gap
−$5.32M
shortfall by 2030-31
⚠ State Budget Dependency
Projections assume current state funding. PA's annual budget and formula changes can materially shift these numbers. Revisit each year when the state budget is enacted.
6
Community Questions
Questions & Answers
Select a question to see the answer. Figures reflect the 2026-27 preliminary budget.
Budget & Taxes
State Funding
Spending & Efficiency
Planning & Future
←
Select a question
Key Point