Richland R-I vs Linton 36
MO · 283 students • ND · 245 students • fiscal year 2024 • swap sides
In one line
- Linton 36 spends 22% more per student than Richland R-I after adjusting for local price levels.
- Richland R-I directs 12 more cents of every operating dollar to instruction than Linton 36.
Are these even comparable?
Establish the shape of each district before reading a single dollar figure.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Students enrolled | 283 | 245 |
| Schools | 2 | 2 |
| Grades served | PK–12 | PK–12 |
| Setting | Rural | Rural |
| County | Stoddard County | Emmons County |
| State | MO | ND |
| Local price level (US = 100) Above 100 means a dollar buys less here than the national average. | 90.8 | 89.0 |
The headline dollar
Current operating spending per student, shown three ways. The first is what each district reports. The second and third are the honest ones for comparison.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Per student, as reported | $15,654 | $18,756 |
| Per student, price-adjusted Divided by the local price level, so both figures are in the same money. | $17,237 | $21,084 |
| Per student, price-adjusted, excluding transport Transportation provision varies enormously between districts and states. Removing it compares the parts both districts actually do. | $16,471 | $19,992 |
| Capital spending per student Buildings and land, never folded into the operating figures above. It is lumpy: a district mid-build looks expensive for two years. | Locked | Locked |
Richland R-I
Linton 36
Where the money comes from
The funding mix determines how exposed a district is to local property values, to state politics, and to federal programmes ending.
Richland R-I
- Local 33.8% Locked
- State 43.3% Locked
- Federal 23.0% Locked
Linton 36
- Local 43.3% Locked
- State 51.4% Locked
- Federal 5.3% Locked
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Local share of revenue Mostly property tax. A high share means school budgets track local property values, up and down. | 33.8% | 43.3% |
| State share of revenue | 43.3% | 51.4% |
| Federal share of revenue | 23.0% | 5.3% |
| Total revenue | Locked | Locked |
How MO funds its districts
The Foundation Formula: a state adequacy target per weighted average daily attendance, less a local effort deduction.
How ND funds its districts
We have not yet written up ND's funding formula, so nothing is claimed here.
Where the money goes
The same slices in the same order for both districts, plus the differences by function — because two pie charts side by side hide exactly the thing you want to see.
Richland R-I
- Instruction 56.6% Locked
- Instructional staff support 2.0% Locked
- Student support 6.0% Locked
- Operations & maintenance 8.9% Locked
- Transportation 4.4% Locked
- Food service 5.9% Locked
- School administration 6.2% Locked
- District administration 7.8% Locked
- Other support 2.1% Locked
- Other current 5.9% Locked
Linton 36
- Instruction 46.3% Locked
- Instructional staff support 0.2% Locked
- Student support 5.0% Locked
- Operations & maintenance 9.6% Locked
- Transportation 5.2% Locked
- Food service 4.8% Locked
- School administration 7.1% Locked
- District administration 5.6% Locked
- Other support 1.6% Locked
- Other current 19.5% Locked
What is actually different
Share of each district's operating dollar, Richland R-I minus Linton 36. Two pie charts side by side are almost impossible to read against each other; this is the same data as one chart.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cents of each operating dollar reaching classrooms Instruction plus instructional staff support, as a share of current spending. | 58.6% | 46.4% |
| Administration share District office plus school administration. | 14.0% | 12.7% |
| Transportation share | 4.4% | 5.2% |
What the money buys
Staffing levels are the most direct thing a budget converts into.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Students per teacher This is a staffing ratio: total enrollment divided by teaching staff. It is NOT average class size. Actual classes are larger than this number in every district. | 10.1 | 10.2 |
| Students per counselor | Locked | Locked |
| Students per administrator | Locked | Locked |
| Total salaries All staff, not teachers alone. | Locked | Locked |
Who they serve
The answer to "but they serve different kids" — which is usually a fair objection.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Child poverty rate Children aged 5 to 17 in poverty within the district boundary. Used instead of free-lunch eligibility, which community eligibility has made unusable for comparison. | 15.8% | 15.5% |
| English learners | — | — |
| Students with disabilities | — | — |
| Enrollment change, 5 years | -3.7% | -7.2% |
Results, and results for the money
Stability and risk
The homebuyer’s real question: what is likely to change after I move in?
Richland R-I
- Federal cliff exposure More than 20% of revenue is federal, a share that is unusually exposed when temporary federal programmes end.
Linton 36
- Declining enrollment Enrollment fell more than 5% over five years. Enrollment decline is the single best predictor of school closures and programme cuts.
- Low share reaching classrooms Under 55% of current spending reaches instruction and instructional support, low against national practice.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| Enrollment change, 5 years | -3.7% | -7.2% |
| Long-term debt per student | Locked | Locked |
| Debt service share of spending | Locked | Locked |
Enrolling a child
Is a seat at your zoned school guaranteed?
Richland R-I
We have no such statement from this district — which is not the same as a promise that your zoned school has room. Most districts never publish the policy in either direction. Ask the school office directly whether your address’s school is enrolling at your child’s grade level before you sign anything.
Linton 36
We have no such statement from this district — which is not the same as a promise that your zoned school has room. Most districts never publish the policy in either direction. Ask the school office directly whether your address’s school is enrolling at your child’s grade level before you sign anything.
- This is the district’s own published wording, not our summary of it. Policies are rewritten between enrollment seasons and a page can be out of date the day after we read it — the school office is the only authority on whether a particular grade at a particular school is full right now.
- A warning here is about capacity, not about your address. It does not mean your child will be moved; it means the district has told you in writing that it may move them.
Comparability notes
- Cross-state comparison. Dollars below are shown both as reported and adjusted to a common price level, because a dollar buys different amounts of teacher in MO and ND.
- At least one district sits outside a metro area with its own published price index, so its cost adjustment uses the statewide index. That is a coarser adjustment.
What these numbers are, exactly
Who decides, and what it costs you
Every band above this one asks what a district spends. This one asks who chose to.
Richland R-I
The district levies its own school tax
This district raises property tax in its own name. Who sets the rate varies by state — an elected board in some, a public vote in others — but the levy is the school system’s own, and it is the part of a tax bill that school politics moves most directly.
Linton 36
The district levies its own school tax
This district raises property tax in its own name. Who sets the rate varies by state — an elected board in some, a public vote in others — but the levy is the school system’s own, and it is the part of a tax bill that school politics moves most directly.
| Richland R-I | Linton 36 | |
|---|---|---|
| School property tax levied, per student Only for districts that levy in their own name. Blank where the county or town levies instead — see the cards above, and read the next row. | $5,783 | $4,386 |
| Appropriated by the county or town, per student What the parent government handed the schools, for dependent systems. This is a general appropriation, not solely property tax. | — | — |
| Property tax as a share of all revenue How much of the budget rides on local property values, and therefore on local votes. | 27.5% | 21.6% |
| Long-term debt already owed, per student The balance at the end of the year, for scale. Repaid over decades, so it is a commitment made by earlier boards rather than a bill arriving now. | Locked | Locked |
| Debt service as a share of spending Interest plus principal repaid this year, against total spending. This is the part of the debt that is being paid now, out of money that would otherwise reach a classroom. | Locked | Locked |
| New long-term debt issued, per student Money borrowed during fiscal year 2024. What this figure does and does not tell you is set out under the table. | $0 | $0 |
- Richland R-I: issued no new long-term debt in fiscal year 2024. That is a reported zero, not a gap in the data.
- Linton 36: issued no new long-term debt in fiscal year 2024. That is a reported zero, not a gap in the data.
- A figure in the borrowing row is not a bond voters approved. It records debt issued, and that includes refinancing existing debt at a new rate — which changes nothing about what a district owes — as well as certificates of participation and lease-revenue debt, which in many states a board can issue with no referendum at all. To find out what was actually on a ballot, check the county election office.
- Debt is repaid over decades. A large balance per student is a commitment made by earlier boards and earlier voters, not a bill arriving this year. The debt service row above it is the part being paid now.
Funding measures on the ballot
Richland R-I
We have not read MO’s election results, so this column is empty because of us and not because of Richland R-I. Whether it has asked its voters for money is a question its county election office can answer and we cannot, yet.
Nobody has read MO’s school election results yet — that is a gap on our side, not a fact about this district. Its county elections office holds what it asked its voters for and what they answered, and that is a public record you can request. What it says is worth asking about at a board meeting.
Linton 36
We hold every school funding measure the state of ND published for 2018, 2020 and 2022, and this district appears in none of them.
What this state publishes: School district ballot questions from the North Dakota Secretary of State's results export, for the 26 elections that office lists back to June 2000. Ten of them carry a school layer at all — every June primary from 2010 on, plus the November generals of 2010 and 2022 — and nothing in the source says whether the empty years before that are years no district asked or years the layer does not reach. Elections held on their own date are missing entirely: only primaries and generals are archived here, so a district's September bond special is not in this file. This is thin coverage and the reason is worth stating plainly. The export records whatever the county auditor typed as the contest name, and nothing else — no ballot wording, no dollar amount, no outcome. Of the 107 school questions it holds, 64 ask whether the board may publish its proceedings in the newspaper, which is not a funding measure; 6 have no contest name at all; and 30 more are a bare label such as 'School District Measure 1', which the state's own biennial publication requirement makes most likely to be that same minutes question rather than a request for money. Those are left out rather than guessed at. That leaves 5 measures, in the four districts whose auditor wrote what was being asked. A North Dakota district shown with no measures may well have asked its voters for money; this source cannot say.
What this band does not answer yet
The detailed figures for Richland R-I and Linton 36
The verdict, the headline dollar, the funding shares, who is served and every comparability caveat are free above, and stay free. What is behind the lock is the detail you would want before acting on any of it:
- capital spending per student
- total revenue and total current spending, and the funding mix in dollars (the percentage shares stay free)
- the ten-line per-student breakdown of where the money goes
- counselor and administrator ratios, and the total salary bill
- the debt behind the risk flags — per student, and as a share of spending
$1.79 for both, for three months, 21 cents less than buying them one at a time.
The 3-month unlock is a single payment and does not renew; it simply ends. A subscription renews, monthly or yearly as chosen, until you cancel. No account to create: this purchase is held in this browser, so clearing site data or moving to another browser loses it, and the phone apps sell their own unlock through their own store. What to do if you lose it.