State Performance Audit Review Summary

Pickerington Local Schools

State Performance Audit Review Summary

Purpose of this Summary

This summary is intended to provide a clear, factual overview of the Ohio Auditor of State’s Performance Audit, how the District has reviewed the findings, and how those findings fit into the District’s broader financial picture. It is not advocacy for or against any specific ballot issue, but a statement of operational context and financial reality.

What the State Performance Audit Is

The Ohio Auditor of State defines a performance audit as an independent, data-driven assessment of operational efficiency within selected functional areas. The audit:

• Relies on quantitative staffing and financial data
• Compares districts to a group of “peer” districts using standardized formulas
• Identifies theoretical efficiency opportunities based on those comparisons

The Audit does not:

• Evaluate classroom instruction or educational quality
• Observe schools or interview students, staff, families, or community members
• Consider local priorities, programming decisions, or district strategic goals
• Require implementation of any recommendation

Summary of Key Audit Findings

The performance audit identifies approximately $5.7 million in average annual savings, primarily related to:

• Staffing levels compared to peer district averages
• Alignment of employer insurance costs with regional benchmarks

The audit also explicitly notes that even full implementation of all recommendations would not resolve the District’s long-term financial challenges.

How the District Has Reviewed the Findings

The District commissioned this audit and has reviewed the findings carefully and in good faith. As part of that review, the administration examined:

• Legal and contractual obligations, including collective bargaining agreements
• Instructional and student support impacts
• Operational feasibility and sustainability of recommended changes
• Whether potential savings would be one-time, short-term, or ongoing

While the audit highlights areas where staffing levels exceed peer averages, it also identifies multiple categories where the District falls below peer benchmarks using the same methodology. This underscores that the audit is a comparative efficiency tool, not a prescriptive staffing or budget plan.

Why the Audit Does Not Replace the Need for Revenue

The District has been operating with deficit spending for the past four fiscal years and projects that, without additional revenue, available reserves will be exhausted by 2028.

Key financial facts:

• Pickerington Local Schools has not placed an operating revenue enhancement on the ballot since 2011
• Typical school district levy cycles range from three to four years to keep pace with rising costs
• Core expenses such as staffing, transportation, special education mandates, and benefits increase annually

Efficiency measures and operational adjustments can help manage costs, but they cannot fully offset long-term structural funding gaps. Performance audit recommendations, by design, do not generate the sustained revenue necessary to maintain ongoing operations.

Next Steps

The District will continue to:

• Use the performance audit as one of several tools for continuous operational improvement
• Evaluate feasible efficiency opportunities where they align with instructional quality and contractual obligations
• Communicate transparently about financial conditions and District needs

The audit will inform future discussions, but decisions regarding staffing, programming, and revenue remain the responsibility of the locally elected Board of Education.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Why did the District commission a performance audit?

The District voluntarily commissioned the audit to gain an independent, data-driven review of operational efficiency and to identify potential areas for improvement.

Does the audit say the District is mismanaging funds?

No. A performance audit does not evaluate intent or stewardship. It identifies efficiency opportunities based on comparisons to peer districts.

Why isn’t the District implementing all of the audit’s recommendations?

Some recommendations are constrained by collective bargaining agreements, legal requirements, instructional priorities, or potential impacts on student services. Each recommendation was reviewed for feasibility and sustainability. Importantly, the auditors conduct no interviews or onsite observations to gain context; their work is exclusively actuarial. 

Doesn’t the audit show $5.7 million in savings?

The audit identifies theoretical average annual savings if all recommendations were implemented. The audit also notes that these savings alone would not resolve the District’s long-term financial challenges.

Could these savings eliminate the need for an income tax initiative?

No. Even full implementation of the audit’s recommendations would not generate sufficient, ongoing revenue to close the District’s projected funding gap.

Has the District already made efficiency improvements?

Yes. The District has not sought an operating revenue enhancement since 2011, reflecting long-term efforts to manage expenses and operate within available resources. We have stretched class sizes beyond our comparable peers and continue to allocate fewer resources to administrative staff than local and state averages. 

Why is the District still facing financial challenges?

School district costs increase annually due to inflation, staffing needs, transportation, and state and federal mandates. Without periodic revenue adjustments, expenses eventually outpace funding.

Is the audit being ignored?

No. The audit has been reviewed carefully and will be used as one of several tools to guide continuous improvement efforts. In fact, the district decreased the number of teachers originally included in our staffing projections to better align with the audit’s findings. 

Who ultimately decides staffing and budget priorities?

Staffing and budget decisions are made by the locally elected Board of Education, informed by district administration, contractual obligations, and educational priorities.

How does this relate to the May Income Tax Initiative? 

The audit provides operational context, while the proposed income tax increase addresses the District’s need for stable, ongoing revenue to maintain programs and services. They serve different purposes.

The Performance Audit is available to read by clicking here.