关于阿尔伯塔省财务状况的蓝带小组报告和建议¹于9月初公开发布。卡尔加里教育委员会（CBE）的董事会花时间仔细研究了与K-12教育相关的报告部分，以及相关的毕马威报告²，并准备好分享其回应。

我们预计随着省政府确定如何资助K-12教育并考虑蓝带小组报告中的建议，政府将意识到：

• 与可比较的其他省份相比，阿尔伯塔每名学生的支出已经低于15％，并且在K-12教育方面已经进行了8年的支出限制；
• 我们课堂中学生需求的复杂性和多样性增长的速度甚至超过了学生入学人数的增长速度；
• 任何服务模型的转型都需要前期投资；
• 学校建筑的维护与新建学校以应对增长同等重要；以及
• 教育支出的增加不仅具有直接的经济效益，而且还具有间接的社会效益，这将使阿尔伯塔省在现在和未来几十年受益。

阿尔伯塔每名学生的支出低于其他省份的平均水平的15％

该报告的一个重要结论是，与不列颠哥伦比亚省（BC）、安大略省和魁北克省的平均水平相比，阿尔伯塔省的支出更高。然而，就K-12教育而言，报告中提供的数据并不支持此结论。报告显示，阿尔伯塔在K-12教育上每名学生的支出为11,121美元，而其他三个比较省份的平均水平为13,028美元³。这意味着阿尔伯塔在K-12教育上实际上比不列颠哥伦比亚、安大略和魁北克的平均水平少花15％。

教育已经在过去八年中受到财务限制

报告指出，过去十年的总教育支出年增长率平均为3.5％，而学生人口增长率为1.5％。未包括在内的是在同一时期内的通货膨胀率每年约为1.5％，并且最大的支出增加发生在2008年至2011年，因为省份履行远远超过增长和通货膨胀的合同义务。自2011-12学年以来，如果省级资金跟上了卡尔加里的通货膨胀率，CBE在2018-19学年将会多收到9900万美元⁴。

由于资金有效减少，班级规模增大

根据最近的佛斯特研究所关于教育支出的报告⁵，考虑了通胀因素后，阿尔伯塔在2010-11学年对公立学校每名学生的支出最高，在那之后每年都减少。不言而喻的是，自2010-11学年以来，阿尔伯塔省的班级规模每年都在增长，现在比2004年当政府认为班级规模过大时还要大⁶。

CBE允许的系统管理和教育委员会治理费用的最高金额为3.6％作为大型学校委员会。不清楚报告在提到阿尔伯塔目前支出24.6％用于管理时是指什么，以及这是否与其他三个省份的22.7％可比。例如，阿尔伯塔和不列颠哥伦比亚之间存在重大的报告差异⁷，这使得我们对信息的可比性产生了质疑。如果没有更精细的细分和定义，将无法确定我们是否在进行可比性比较，或者应该在哪些领域寻求进一步的效率。我们知道自己一直在不断审查自己的拨款⁸，以最好地支持学生学习，并且如果有任何关于如何改进的具体建议，我们总是愿意听取的。⁹

显示保持总教育资金不变不是一个选择

我们很高兴看到报告建议确保资金分配公式解决学生入学人数的增长。然而，只有针对入学人数增长的资金分配并不解决成本上涨，如通货膨胀。它也没有考虑到和入学人数相比，复杂学习需求的学生人数以比入学人数更快的速度增长。根据最近对CBE的省级运营审查，审查了五年来复杂学习需求学生的数量增长了67％，而CBE整体学生人口的增长率为12％¹⁰。每年，CBE花费 8000万美元以上来支持这些学生，这意味着有限的资金已经被重定向用于其他领域。我们需要为这些学生所需要的专门支持和服务提供足够的资金。

为了长期节约，需要更多的合作

我们欣喜地看到报告建议努力促进教育系统内的合作而不是竞争。我们省内拥有非常丰富的专业知识，我们需要找到更有效的方式分享最佳实践，以减轻过度负担的员工工作量并改善学生学习成果。然而，可以产生长期节约并取得更好成果的举措总是需要前期投资的支持。例如，新的课程只有在适当培训和为数以千计的员工提供新的支持材料的情况下才能带来改善的学生成果。更协作的采购系统可以带来节约，但只有在先投入资金进行设计、实施和过渡到新系统之后才能实现。尝试在没有前期投资的情况下转变服务可能不会达到预期的结果，同时对其他服务产生影响。

需要关注学校建筑的维护

我们同意报告的结论，即该省更看重新的资本项目而忽视了维护和翻新现有设施的费用。虽然我们继续需要新的学校来容纳增长，特别是在卡尔加里高中水平，CBE将在三年内达到100％容量，但我们也认识到我们的55％学校（134个建筑物）已经超过50年的使用寿命。CBE目前的植物运营和维护经费每年比资金多花1000万美元，该省估计我们未资助的即时维护需求费用为1.62亿美元。

在教育投资中存在直接经济影响

该报告还明确指出，除了审查支出之外，阿尔伯塔还需要“考虑措施，以促进经济的增长和多样化，创造就业机会，并逐渐增加收入。”降低公司税，从而降低省级财务收入，直接惠及经济的前提也可以应用于教育支出。增加教育支出不仅直接带来经济效益，还有许多间接的长期社会效益，最终将减轻公共服务的压力。加拿大会议委员会在6月发布了一个关于安大略省教育支出的报告，该报告的三个关键发现是：

• 每一加元的公共教育支出在总经济方面为安大略省带来$1.30。
• 公共教育可以产生社会福利，如提高的人口医疗保健，更高的生活水平，以及犯罪率的下降。这减少了对安大略省的社会救助，公共健康保险，交通和刑事司法服务的需求。
• 每个附加的高中学生使安大略省政府获得了（平均）每年$2,767。 
  

阿尔伯塔儿童的教育确实是对我们当前和未来社会的一种投资，并且需要得到承认。

¹ 报告和建议：关于阿尔伯塔省财务状况的蓝带小组报告。2019年8月      

² 蓝带小组关于阿尔伯塔省财务状况的研究与分析。毕马威，2019年8月15日

³ 第35页显示每名学生的总支出情况为：BC-9,681美元；ON-17,077美元；QC-12,325美元。然而，报告还指出“没有出现不列颠哥伦比亚和安大略的统计结果；这些省份的学校董事会的支出是根据估算假设计算的。”

⁴ 使用加拿大统计局卡尔加里的通货膨胀率计算

⁵ 麦克劳德，安吉拉和乔尔埃默斯（2019）。教育支出在加拿大公立学校中的情况。教育支出在加拿大2019。佛瑟研究所。

⁶ 阿尔伯塔省审计长报告2015年10月。

⁷加拿大公立学校委员会文章“无法比较苹果与橙子。” (点击此处查看) 

⁸ 附有关于阿尔伯塔省教育委员会学校的每一分钱的分配情况的详细信息，附有审计的财务报表以及链接到预算反馈表格的链接，可以在我们的预算和财务信息页面上找到。 

¹⁰ 卡尔加里教育委员会（CBE）的财务审查报告。阿尔伯塔教育局。2018年4月。

¹¹教育投资的经济案例。加拿大会议委员会。2019年6月。

The report and recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Alberta's Finances¹ were publicly released in early September. The Board of Trustees of the Calgary Board of Education (CBE) have taken the time to carefully examine the areas of the report that pertain to K-12 education, as well as the associated KPMG report², and is now prepared to share its response.

We expect that as the provincial government determines how it will fund K-12 education and considers the recommendations contained in the Blue Ribbon Panel's report that it will recognize that:

• Alberta already spends 15 per cent less per student than comparable provinces and has already undergone 8 years of spending restraint in K-12 education; 
• The complexity and diversity of student needs within our classrooms continues to grow even faster than student enrolment growth; 
• Any transformation of service delivery models requires upfront investments; 
• The maintenance of school buildings is just as important as building new schools to accommodate growth; and 
• Increased spending on education has direct economic benefits as well as indirect social benefits that will benefit Alberta now and for decades to come. 

Alberta spends 15 per cent less than the average of other provinces on K-12 education

A major conclusion of the report is that Alberta is spending more in comparison to the average of the provinces of British Columbia (BC), Ontario, and Quebec. When it comes to K-12 education, however, the data provided in the report does not support this conclusion. The report shows that Alberta spends $11,121 per student on K-12 education, while the average of the other three comparison provinces is $13,028³. This means that Alberta is actually spending 15 per cent less on K-12 education than the average of BC, Ontario and Quebec.

Education has already been under fiscal restraint for the past eight years

The report states that total education expenditures over the past ten years have increased by an average of 3.5 per cent per year while student population growth has been 1.5 per cent per year. Not included was the fact that inflation over that same time period was another 1.5 per cent per year and that the largest spending increases were from 2008-11 due to the province fulfilling contractual obligations that far exceeded growth and inflation. Since 2011-12, if provincial funding had kept pace with the inflation rate in Calgary, the CBE would have received $99 million more in 2018-19.⁴

Class sizes have increased due to an effective decrease in funding

According to the most recent Fraser Institute report on education spending⁵, after accounting for inflation, Alberta spent the most per student in public schools in 2010-11 and has spent less ever since. It is no coincidence that class sizes across the province have also risen every year since 2010-11 and are now higher than in 2004 when the government determined that class sizes were too large⁶.

Alberta caps administration and governance expenditures at 3.6 per cent to 5.4 per cent

As a large school board, the maximum amount that the CBE is allowed to spend on system administration and school board governance expenses is 3.6 per cent. It is unclear what the report is referring to when it states that Alberta currently spends 24.6 per cent on administration or if this is even comparable to the average of the three other provinces at 22.7 per cent. For example, there are significant reporting differences⁷ between B.C. and Alberta that call into question the comparability of information. Without more precise breakdowns and definitions, it is impossible to know if we are comparing apples to apples, or in which areas we should be looking for further efficiencies. What we do know is that we are continually examining our own allocations⁸ in order to best support student learning, and that if there are any specific suggestions on how this can be improved, we are always open to hearing them.⁹

Simply maintaining total education funding is not an option

We were pleased to see that the report recommends ensuring that the funding formula addresses student enrolment growth. However, funding for enrolment growth only does not address increasing costs, such as inflation. It also does not consider that the number of students with complex learning needs is growing at a much faster rate than enrolment. According to the recent provincial operational review of the CBE, over the five years examined, the number of students with complex learning needs grew by 67 per cent while overall CBE student enrolment growth was 12 per cent¹⁰. Every year the CBE spends $80 million more than we receive in funding to support these students, which means that limited dollars are already being redirected from other areas. We need adequate funding for the specialized supports and services that these students require.

Greater collaboration for long-term savings requires upfront investment

We appreciated the report's recommendation on working towards fostering collaboration within the education system rather than competition. There is so much expertise across this province and we need to find more effective ways of sharing best practices in order to reduce the workload on overburdened staff while improving student learning outcomes. However, initiatives that result in long-term savings and better outcomes always require upfront investments to be effective. For example, a new curriculum could result in improved student outcomes, but only if appropriate training and new supporting materials are provided to the thousands of staff who will be responsible for implementing it. A more collaborative procurement system could result in savings, but only after funds have been deployed to design, implement and transition to the new system over time. Attempting to transform services without an upfront investment may not achieve the desired results without impacting other services. 

Attention is needed around the maintenance of school buildings

We agree with the report's findings that the province has favoured building new capital projects at the expense of maintaining and renovating existing facilities. While we continue to need new schools to accommodate enrolment growth, especially at the high school level where the CBE will be at 100 per cent capacity within three years, we also recognize that 55 per cent of our schools (134 buildings) are over 50 years old. The CBE currently spends $10 million more than we receive in plant operations and maintenance funding each year and the province estimates that our unfunded deferred maintenance costs for immediate needs is $162 million.

Direct economic impacts arise from investing in education

The report was also clear that beyond examining its spending, Alberta also needs “to look at measures that will grow and diversify the economy, create jobs and increase revenues over time." The premise of decreasing corporate taxes, which results in lower provincial revenues, to directly benefit the economy, could also be applied to education spending. Increased education spending has direct economic benefits in addition to a myriad of indirect long-term social benefits that will ultimately decrease pressures on public services. In June, the Conference Board of Canada released a report on education spending in Ontario where three of the key findings were:

• Each dollar of public education spending generates $1.30 in total economic impacts to Ontario. At the same time, the inverse holds true for each dollar taken from public education.
• Public education can generate social benefits, such as a healthier population, a higher standard of living, and a reduction in crime. That lessens demand for Ontario's social assistance, public health care, and criminal justice services.
• Each additional high school graduate saves the Ontario government (on average)
  $2,767 each year on social assistance, health care, and criminal justice, while each additional high school non-completer costs the province $3,128 each year.¹¹
   

The education of Alberta's children is truly an investment in our current and future society and needs to be recognized as such. 

¹ Report and Recommendations: Blue Ribbon Panel on Alberta's Finances. August 2019      

² Research & Analysis for use of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Alberta's Finances. KPMG, August 15, 2019

³ Total expenditures per student shown on page 35 for: BC - $9,681; ON - $17,077; QC - $12,325. However, the report also notes that “Consolidated views for British Columbia and Ontario do not exist; expenditures by school boards for these provinces were included using estimating assumptions."

⁴ Calculated using Statistics Canada Calgary inflation rates

⁵ MacLeod, Angela, and Joel Emes (2019). Education Spending in Public Schools in Canada. Fraser Institute.

⁶ Report of the Auditor General of Alberta - October 2015

⁷ASBA News “You can't compare apples to oranges" 

⁸ Dividing the Dollar:  How Every Cent of Alberta Education Funding Supports CBE Schools attached.

⁹ Detailed information on CBE budgets and audited financials as well as a link to a budget feedback form can be found on our budget and financial information page. 

¹⁰ Calgary Board of Education (CBE) Financial Review Report. Alberta Education. April 2018

¹¹The Economic Case for Investing in Education. The Conference Board of Canada. June 2019.