Network Funding Projection
Last updated 20 August 2026 — formula mechanics on both legs brought in line with the reconciled CSF engine (online/EHS netting and weight caps, membership-based 1994-leg at-risk, per-pupil rural sharing, three-condition concentration).
Projected funding from FY 2025-26 baseline through FY 2031-32, under HB25-1320 and SB26-023 — Northeast and Southeast campuses with a network rollup. Both campuses are district-authorized (Denver County 1). This model provides a defensible, third-party calculation the network can bring to its authorizer.
01 · INPUTS & PER-CAMPUS PROJECTION
Each campus shows its FY26 estimated baseline, an editable FY27-FY32 inputs matrix, the gross-net-PPR projection with year-over-year change, and a breakdown of where the funding comes from in any selected year. FY27 defaults from CDE district data, CDE 2025-26 pupil membership records, and CDE 2024-25 FRL eligibility. FY28-FY32 default to FY27 values — set separate growth rates for enrollment, at-risk, ELL, and SPED, or edit any cell directly.
Authorizer: Denver County 1 (district-authorized) · Accounting district: Denver County 1 (0880) · CDE code: 4049
Pre-K–5 campus, 503 K-12 funded count (FY25-26). At-risk share (75.5%) sits well above the Denver County 1 average (65.4%), so both the old-formula upper at-risk band and the new-formula at-risk weights matter here. FY26 baseline is an estimate — replace with the actual passthrough receipt.
Authorizer: Denver County 1 (district-authorized) · Accounting district: Denver County 1 (0880) · CDE code: 3987
K–8 campus, 587 funded count (FY25-26). At-risk share (55.7%) sits below the Denver County 1 average (65.4%). At default inputs the FY27 floor trails the phase-in by only about $54K, so the FY26 actual receipt materially affects the FY27 figure. FY26 baseline is an estimate — replace with the actual passthrough receipt.
FY27 base PPR is set at $8,900.40 (the appropriated rate — a 2.4% increase over FY26's $8,692). This input controls the assumed annual growth rate for FY28 onward, compounding through FY32. Default is 2.0% as a conservative planning baseline.
02 · NETWORK ROLLUP
The network total is a sum of two independent calculations. Each campus is funded on its own demographics and floor mechanics — the rollup just adds the results.
Seven-year trajectory · FY26 estimate → FY32 projection
Gross total program — applicable amount each year, with FY26 as the estimated starting point (placeholders pending actual receipts). The dotted line shows the network's full new-formula value each year; the gap closes through phase-in.
03 · PLANNING IMPLICATIONS
Plain-language interpretation for school leaders, boards, and the Denver County 1 finance office. Highline Academy operates two Denver campuses — Northeast (503 K-12 funded count) and Southeast (587) — with materially different demographic profiles. Each campus is funded on its own demographics; the network rollup is the sum.
The new formula adds explicit per-pupil weights for at-risk, ELL, and SPED populations (about $2,225 per identified student in FY27, rising with base PPR inflation). The two campuses sit on opposite sides of the district average: Northeast's at-risk share (75.5%) is well above Denver County 1's 65.4%, while Southeast's (55.7%) is below it. Both campuses carry ELL shares (26.2% and 24.7%) above the district's 19.0%; Northeast's SPED share (22.1%) is far above the district's 14.7% while Southeast's (9.9%) is below it.
The phase-in runs in 15-percentage-point increments: 30% new formula in FY27, then 45%, 60%, 75%, 90%, and 100% by FY32.
FY26 → FY32 trajectory under current inputs: — Bill benefit at full implementation (FY32 new-formula PPR vs full old-formula PPR): —Both campuses are district-authorized. Denver County 1 calculates and passes through the school-generated funding under §22-30.5-112, retaining up to 5% for administrative overhead. This model's purpose is to give Highline a defensible, third-party calculation of what each campus's students generate under HB25-1320 / SB26-023 — a concrete basis for conversations with the district about passthrough amounts.
The school-vs-district comparisons in Section 01 are the foundation. Because the two campuses diverge in opposite directions — Northeast generates more per pupil than the district average, Southeast closer to it — campus-level calculations are more defensible than a blended network number in passthrough conversations. Each campus can point to specific line items (at-risk supplement, ELL supplement) to demonstrate the dollar value its population generates.
Denver County 1's COL factor is unchanged between the old (0.23) and new (0.23) studies, so there's no COL divergence risk. Denver is Colorado's largest district (FPC ~83,700), so no size or locale factors apply — but district size does change the old-formula at-risk calculation: districts over 50,000 FPC use the steeper 0.36 concentration slope per §22-54-104(5)(f)(II), which raises Northeast's old-formula leg and therefore its FY28–FY31 hold-harmless floor.
This tool models total program funding under HB25-1320 / SB26-023. Not modeled: federal and state non-formula revenue (Title I, IDEA, ELL grants, MLO override revenue), cash-flow timing, or the specific mechanics of how Denver County 1 calculates its passthrough to each Highline campus under §22-30.5-112. The 5% retention rate is the statutory maximum for district-authorized charters — the actual rate may be lower depending on the district's charter contract.
COL factors beyond FY28 are held constant at the FY28 level (no future biennial study has been conducted). FY29–FY32 figures repeat the FY28 COL factor as an explicit assumption.
04 · METHODOLOGY & CAVEATS
The funding model implements the new-formula charter funding methodology established by HB25-1320 and the FY28-FY32 phase-in schedule, with CDE's authoritative FY28+ cost-of-living factors. Both Highline campuses are district-authorized (Denver County 1, §22-30.5-112); no published district estimate exists for reconciliation — independent verification is pending.
Every figure in this tool belongs to one of four categories.
Set by enrolled bill text. Not adjustable.
Finalized administrative implementation of the charter funding formula. Authoritative for actual distributions.
From primary source files. Updates require new source publication.
User-adjustable. Defaults provided where source data exists.
FY26 is an estimate for each campus: Denver County 1's FY26 adjusted in-school per-pupil funding ($12,218.50, CDE FY25-26 district funding worksheet) × each campus's FY25-26 K-12 funded count (503 NE, 587 SE). Both are editable inputs — overwrite with verified receipts from Denver County 1. Each campus's FY27 hold-harmless floor is its FY26 figure × 1.01, and FY27 year-over-year changes are calculated against it.
Base PPR × FPC, plus at-risk / ELL / SPED at 25% of base PPR per pupil, plus cost-of-living, locale, and size factors. Concentration factor requires school AR > 70% in a district under 7,000 funded count with district AR > 70%. Neither Highline campus qualifies (Denver County 1's funded count far exceeds 7,000); locale and size are zero for Denver County 1.
FY27-FY31 funding is a blend of the prior (1994) formula and the new formula, weighted 30% / 45% / 60% / 75% / 90% to the new formula. FY32 is 100% new formula.
FY27 floor = FY26 actual × 1.01. FY28-FY31 floor = same-year prior-formula leg × 1.01 (current-year basis). FY32 has no statutory floor. School receives the greater of phase-in or floor.
Both legs follow the reconciled reading settled with CSI and CDE in August 2026. Multi-district online, P-Tech and TREP pupils are funded at their flat rates only: their FTE is netted out of the base and out of every factor base, and the at-risk, ELL and SPED counts are capped at the netted FTE (schools with no such pupils are unaffected). Concentration requires all three conditions — district under 7,000 funded, district above 70% at-risk, and this school above 70% at-risk. The $100,000 remote add-on and the district's actual rural funding are shared per pupil rather than paid per charter. On the 1994 leg the at-risk-at-average count is measured on membership, the result is the greater of the banded amount and the two flat 12% branches, and the state minimum runs on the netted count. These mechanics match the engine behind the CSF school-funding check.
FY27 uses the older (2023) COL study; FY28 onward uses CDE's rebased April 2026 study. No study exists beyond the FY28 biennium, so FY29-FY32 hold the FY28 factor constant — an explicit assumption, not a projection. Future biennial studies have not yet been conducted.
District-authorized charters: up to 5% (statutory maximum). The actual retention percentage may vary by contract with Denver County 1. This model uses 5% as the conservative assumption.
YoY $ and % change are calculated on Per-Pupil Revenue, isolating formula and demographic-composition effects from raw enrollment growth.