Anonymous
02/28/2026 10:27
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Would you send your kid to Lewis if top 10% was guaranteed admissions to UVA?
Anonymous
02/28/2026 10:19
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Trying to do some calculations:
Lewis: ~1,540 students x $20,687/student = $31,857,980
WS: ~2,840 students x $16,729/student = $47,510,360
For comparison purposes, bring WS down to the same number of students as Lewis:
1,540 students x $16,729/student = $25,762,660 (total cost if WS had the same number of students as Lewis)
Lewis would cost $6,095,320 more to operate than WS if they had the same number of students.
Leaving out that the buildings are different sizes and have different operating costs, at roughly $250,000 per staff member (total cost for a teacher, salary, benefits) you are looking at Lewis having around 24-25 more staff members. That is likely used for ELL or other services for non-native students. Lewis ELL percentage is around 7 times as high as WS.
Lewis: ~1,540 students x $20,687/student = $31,857,980
WS: ~2,840 students x $16,729/student = $47,510,360
For comparison purposes, bring WS down to the same number of students as Lewis:
1,540 students x $16,729/student = $25,762,660 (total cost if WS had the same number of students as Lewis)
Lewis would cost $6,095,320 more to operate than WS if they had the same number of students.
Leaving out that the buildings are different sizes and have different operating costs, at roughly $250,000 per staff member (total cost for a teacher, salary, benefits) you are looking at Lewis having around 24-25 more staff members. That is likely used for ELL or other services for non-native students. Lewis ELL percentage is around 7 times as high as WS.
Anonymous
02/28/2026 10:07
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
From the order of the list, ELL is clearly the large driver of costs per pupil.
Does this include all school operating costs, like power, water, and maintenance costs? Because some schools are not utilized as efficiently as others. For example, Lewis operates around 70% of Design Capacity, while West Springfield operates at over 100%.
Chantilly seems to be an outlier. Academy costs?
Does this include all school operating costs, like power, water, and maintenance costs? Because some schools are not utilized as efficiently as others. For example, Lewis operates around 70% of Design Capacity, while West Springfield operates at over 100%.
Chantilly seems to be an outlier. Academy costs?
Anonymous
02/28/2026 09:31
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:I suspect that a lot of the "extra" money at the poorer schools is due to additional federal funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
They can get more for their tax dollars and shorten the commute time for their kids. That means more sleep for their kids. And less competition for the top schools. UVA is easier to get into now!
Sounds like a win!
Anonymous
02/28/2026 06:56
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:The discussion about how much FCPS is going to be spending per pupil at Skyview led me to question what VDOE has been reporting FCPS as spending per pupil at each high school.
The latest VDOE data is from 2023-24:
Lewis $20,687
Falls Church $20,557
Mount Vernon $20,284
... However, it's not clear why schools like Madison and Woodson get more per student than South County, or over $1,000 more per student than McLean, Langley, West Springfield, and Oakton.
https://schoolquality.virginia.gov/download-data go to top right. Click on download data- schools, division, finance. That generates a spreadsheet. Fed column is $ for sped, ESL, title 1 I guess. Original poster numbers are net of federal. If you see a school with higher $ than a comparable SES school without sped transfers in for a program then the numbers go up per pupil based on other programs like immersion, elementary magnets, cost of IB v AP.
FCPS program budget https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/FY-2026-Program-Budget.pdf No breakdown on the 3.77m AAP transport by elementary versus middle. .645m for the elementary magnets so those 3 sites [Baileys 2] are almost 2 m extra. Some programs had grant money when installed and that evaporates.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 20:15
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
FCPS are really not getting a good return on investment. Way over paying for sub par reading and math results.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 19:34
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:I suspect that a lot of the "extra" money at the poorer schools is due to additional federal funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 19:33
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I suspect that a lot of the "extra" money at the poorer schools is due to additional federal funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
Schools like Langley receive fewer state/local funds and fewer federal funds, but the bigger difference is in the amount of state/local funds received. You can confirm this by looking at the VDOE school profiles.
Langley doesn’t need it. What’s your point?
Anonymous
02/27/2026 19:30
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:I suspect that a lot of the "extra" money at the poorer schools is due to additional federal funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
Schools like Langley receive fewer state/local funds and fewer federal funds, but the bigger difference is in the amount of state/local funds received. You can confirm this by looking at the VDOE school profiles.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 19:05
Subject: Re:S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
I suspect that a lot of the "extra" money at the poorer schools is due to additional federal funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
I'm not sure if the Free and Reduced Lunch funds (federal), ELL instruction (also federal), Special Education funds (is that federal?) are included.
Is there any Title I in high school? That is definitely federal funding.
However, special programs like Academies would also bring extra funds to the school.
So, I don't think FCPS is shorting the schools in wealthier areas like Langley. But, if the Langley parents are upset about paying more taxes and getting less, I understand that there is a school that is very close to many of the families that receives far more funds.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 17:06
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The discussion about how much FCPS is going to be spending per pupil at Skyview led me to question what VDOE has been reporting FCPS as spending per pupil at each high school.
The latest VDOE data is from 2023-24:
Lewis $20,687
Falls Church $20,557
Mount Vernon $20,284
Chantilly $19,562
Annandale: $19,535
West Potomac $19,353
Edison $19,231
Herndon $19,205
Justice $18,837
TJ $18,756 [possibly supplemented with private donations through the TJ Partnership Fund]
Fairfax $18,739
South Lakes $18,524
Centreville $18,413
Marshall $18,371
Madison $18,187
Woodson $18,140
Westfield $18,121
Hayfield $17,776
Robinson $17,658
Lake Braddock $17,519
South County $17,456
McLean $16,934
Langley $16,881
West Springfield $16,729
Oakton $16,676
Some of the differences seem fairly obvious. High schools with more poor kids and/or Academy programs get the most money. The 7-12 secondary schools are reported as getting less money per pupil because less is spent on kids in grades 7-8 than in grades 9-12. High schools with fewer poor kids, no Academy programs, and AP get the least money. However, it's not clear why schools like Madison and Woodson get more per student than South County, or over $1,000 more per student than McLean, Langley, West Springfield, and Oakton.
Why exactly do the RIO mommies want to stay at Oakton?
Langley, McLean, and Oakton don’t have high numbers of ELL or specialized SPED programs, like CSS so the money that they get goes to more of the students instead of being focused on ELL and high need SPED students. They like it that way.
It's more like FCPS likes to shortchange these schools whenever it has a chance.
No, it’s that the kids at those schools don’t need specialized programs with additional adults to help them learn. Instead they have more AP classes offered, fewer in class disruptions, and fewer issues caused by poverty, learning issues, and emotional dysregulation.
PP’s head would explode if there were distinct numbers provided for the per-SPED and ELL pupil at each school.
My kid is at a school in the middle of the list that has a lot of ELL. I’ll bet the per pupil at his school for non-SPED non-ELL is lower than Langley or McLean.
But yes, adding a lot of ELL students in the course of a few years definitely changes things.
DP. Of course, that’s speculative without the data to back it up, but if you want to add more special education kids to a school like McLean that’s seen 375 kids redistricted to Langley over the past five years we should be talking again about when they plan to renovate and expand MHS. It does currently provide services to students with autism.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 17:01
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Sad, but honestly not surprising anymore.
Look at the numbers. McLean at 16,934. Langley at 16,881. Oakton at 16,676. Among the lowest per pupil funding levels in the county.
Meanwhile, many homeowners in these districts are paying 25,000 to 35,000 dollars per year in real estate taxes alone. And that is just one category. Add the county meals tax, personal property tax on vehicles, car registration fees, stormwater fees, dog license fees, recordation taxes, plus state income and sales taxes. The overall tax burden here is substantial.
Yet the areas contributing some of the highest property tax revenue per household are near the bottom in per student school spending.
We keep hearing that schools with higher poverty rates or academy programs receive more funding. But logically, that means families in certain districts are effectively subsidizing others while receiving less direct investment in their own schools. Whether one supports redistribution or not, it should at least be openly acknowledged and justified, not brushed aside as automatic or inevitable.
The gap is not minor. Some schools receive more than 3,000 dollars per student above McLean or Langley. Even Madison and Woodson are over 1,000 dollars higher. That is a meaningful difference.
Taxes continue to rise. Many residents feel county services are not improving proportionally. Infrastructure concerns, snow removal issues, uneven services, and now visible disparities in school funding.
This is exactly why people are leaving for lower tax states and counties. They would rather pay lower overall taxes and choose private schools or private services directly, where they believe they have more control and clearer value. Agree or disagree, that migration trend is real and it is not happening by accident.
If you have one child in public school at one of the bolded schools, and are paying $25k a year in property taxes, you are still getting a good deal as property taxes also all the other county services. If you have two children, you are well ahead of the game.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 16:19
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The discussion about how much FCPS is going to be spending per pupil at Skyview led me to question what VDOE has been reporting FCPS as spending per pupil at each high school.
The latest VDOE data is from 2023-24:
Lewis $20,687
Falls Church $20,557
Mount Vernon $20,284
Chantilly $19,562
Annandale: $19,535
West Potomac $19,353
Edison $19,231
Herndon $19,205
Justice $18,837
TJ $18,756 [possibly supplemented with private donations through the TJ Partnership Fund]
Fairfax $18,739
South Lakes $18,524
Centreville $18,413
Marshall $18,371
Madison $18,187
Woodson $18,140
Westfield $18,121
Hayfield $17,776
Robinson $17,658
Lake Braddock $17,519
South County $17,456
McLean $16,934
Langley $16,881
West Springfield $16,729
Oakton $16,676
Some of the differences seem fairly obvious. High schools with more poor kids and/or Academy programs get the most money. The 7-12 secondary schools are reported as getting less money per pupil because less is spent on kids in grades 7-8 than in grades 9-12. High schools with fewer poor kids, no Academy programs, and AP get the least money. However, it's not clear why schools like Madison and Woodson get more per student than South County, or over $1,000 more per student than McLean, Langley, West Springfield, and Oakton.
Why exactly do the RIO mommies want to stay at Oakton?
Langley, McLean, and Oakton don’t have high numbers of ELL or specialized SPED programs, like CSS so the money that they get goes to more of the students instead of being focused on ELL and high need SPED students. They like it that way.
It's more like FCPS likes to shortchange these schools whenever it has a chance.
No, it’s that the kids at those schools don’t need specialized programs with additional adults to help them learn. Instead they have more AP classes offered, fewer in class disruptions, and fewer issues caused by poverty, learning issues, and emotional dysregulation.
+100 The ignorance is stunning
Anonymous
02/27/2026 16:00
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The discussion about how much FCPS is going to be spending per pupil at Skyview led me to question what VDOE has been reporting FCPS as spending per pupil at each high school.
The latest VDOE data is from 2023-24:
Lewis $20,687
Falls Church $20,557
Mount Vernon $20,284
Chantilly $19,562
Annandale: $19,535
West Potomac $19,353
Edison $19,231
Herndon $19,205
Justice $18,837
TJ $18,756 [possibly supplemented with private donations through the TJ Partnership Fund]
Fairfax $18,739
South Lakes $18,524
Centreville $18,413
Marshall $18,371
Madison $18,187
Woodson $18,140
Westfield $18,121
Hayfield $17,776
Robinson $17,658
Lake Braddock $17,519
South County $17,456
McLean $16,934
Langley $16,881
West Springfield $16,729
Oakton $16,676
Some of the differences seem fairly obvious. High schools with more poor kids and/or Academy programs get the most money. The 7-12 secondary schools are reported as getting less money per pupil because less is spent on kids in grades 7-8 than in grades 9-12. High schools with fewer poor kids, no Academy programs, and AP get the least money. However, it's not clear why schools like Madison and Woodson get more per student than South County, or over $1,000 more per student than McLean, Langley, West Springfield, and Oakton.
Why exactly do the RIO mommies want to stay at Oakton?
Langley, McLean, and Oakton don’t have high numbers of ELL or specialized SPED programs, like CSS so the money that they get goes to more of the students instead of being focused on ELL and high need SPED students. They like it that way.
It's more like FCPS likes to shortchange these schools whenever it has a chance.
No, it’s that the kids at those schools don’t need specialized programs with additional adults to help them learn. Instead they have more AP classes offered, fewer in class disruptions, and fewer issues caused by poverty, learning issues, and emotional dysregulation.
PP’s head would explode if there were distinct numbers provided for the per-SPED and ELL pupil at each school.
My kid is at a school in the middle of the list that has a lot of ELL. I’ll bet the per pupil at his school for non-SPED non-ELL is lower than Langley or McLean.
But yes, adding a lot of ELL students in the course of a few years definitely changes things.
Anonymous
02/27/2026 15:30
Subject: S/O FCPS Per Pupil Spending at High Schools
Anonymous wrote:Sad, but honestly not surprising anymore.
Look at the numbers. McLean at 16,934. Langley at 16,881. Oakton at 16,676. Among the lowest per pupil funding levels in the county.
Meanwhile, many homeowners in these districts are paying 25,000 to 35,000 dollars per year in real estate taxes alone. And that is just one category. Add the county meals tax, personal property tax on vehicles, car registration fees, stormwater fees, dog license fees, recordation taxes, plus state income and sales taxes. The overall tax burden here is substantial.
Yet the areas contributing some of the highest property tax revenue per household are near the bottom in per student school spending.
We keep hearing that schools with higher poverty rates or academy programs receive more funding. But logically, that means families in certain districts are effectively subsidizing others while receiving less direct investment in their own schools. Whether one supports redistribution or not, it should at least be openly acknowledged and justified, not brushed aside as automatic or inevitable.
The gap is not minor. Some schools receive more than 3,000 dollars per student above McLean or Langley. Even Madison and Woodson are over 1,000 dollars higher. That is a meaningful difference.
Taxes continue to rise. Many residents feel county services are not improving proportionally. Infrastructure concerns, snow removal issues, uneven services, and now visible disparities in school funding.
This is exactly why people are leaving for lower tax states and counties. They would rather pay lower overall taxes and choose private schools or private services directly, where they believe they have more control and clearer value. Agree or disagree, that migration trend is real and it is not happening by accident.
Disagree qnd you only have to look to Maryland to see how the W schools are very different from the rest of the county even though they have direct funding for schools through development. FCPS has done very well over the years by focusing on the entire school system. While I dont agree there need to be IB programs in poorer schools they were probably put there to actually make a school within a school like a mini TJ within the school to attract families. FCPS has 3 schools that fall behind the national average. They need to put their thinking caps on why this is and fix it. Oakton and Langley and McLean are doing just fine without more funding. FCPS just needs to use their funds wisely and stop making changes that are unneeded like their silly experiment with standards based grading.