FY2027 Budget
Updates & Materials
FY27 Operating Budget Overview
A school department’s operating budget is the annual financial plan that supports the day-to-day operation of the schools. It covers the ongoing costs required to educate students and keep schools running safely and effectively.
The operating budget funds expenses such as teacher and staff salaries and benefits, classroom supplies, instructional materials, transportation, utilities, special education services, and routine maintenance. These costs recur each year and are directly tied to providing educational programs and services to students.
While the capital budget focuses on long-term investments like buildings and major equipment, the operating budget pays for the people, programs, and services that support students every day during the school year.
- DPS Operating Budget History and Challenges
- DPS Operating Budget At Work
- School Department FY2027 Proposed Operating Budget
- FY27 Budget Book Submitted to Finance & Warrant Committee March 2026
DPS Operating Budget History and Challenges

The chart shown above illustrates straight growth year over year. The chart below adds level service funding requirements from F21-F26, illustrating the gap between approved funding levels and the cost of sustaining core services.

Structural Underfunding Over Time
The chart shown above illustrates a persistent gap between what it costs to maintain level service in the Dedham School Department and what has actually been approved through Town Meeting over multiple fiscal years. From FY21 through FY26, the approved budget has never fully funded level service. Each year, the School Department has absorbed the difference through internal adjustments rather than additional revenue. This is not episodic underfunding. It is cumulative structural underfunding.
What This Chart Explains
This chart visually explains the data that Superintendent Murphy referenced during the presentation of the budget on January 6, 2026. Specifically why:
- programs feel thinner
- staff feel stretched
- facility maintenance and improvements are deferred
“Level Service” within the Context of Cumulative Structural Underfunding
It is important to be explicit about what the red “Level Service” line represents:
- It does not represent expansion, new programs, or aspirational improvements
It reflects:
- Contractual salary obligations
- Special education tuition and transportation
- Utilities and operational inflation
- Maintaining existing staffing and services
In other words, the red line represents fixed costs required to stand still. The blue line represents what has actually been funded.
The Gap Is Manageable Early — Then Becomes Structurally Significant
In FY21–FY23, the gap between approved funding and level service was relatively modest and managed through:
- Position control
- Adjustments to funding for goods and services
- Minor program reductions
- Deferral of purchases
However, beginning in FY24 and accelerating in FY25, the gap becomes materially larger.
By FY24 and FY25:
- Non-personnel accounts reduced as far as possible
- Level service jumps sharply
- The approved budget lags by several million dollars
This is the inflection point where “managing within the budget” becomes “reducing service to align with the budget.”
FY25 Is the Break Point
The steep increase in the level-service line in FY25 is critical to understanding the current situation.
This reflects:
- Accumulated contractual increases
- Post-pandemic cost normalization
- Continued special education cost growth
- Inflation catching up to previously suppressed budgets
The system did not suddenly become more expensive in FY25. The true cost simply became unavoidable.
FY26 & Projections for FY27 Demonstrate a Persistent and Problematic Pattern
Even as the approved budget increases in FY26 and FY27, the gap remains.
That indicates:
- The issue is not a single bad budget year
- It is not solvable through incremental efficiency
- It reflects a revenue framework that cannot keep pace with required costs
Absent structural revenue changes the blue line will continue to chase the red line and never fully catch it.
DPS Operating Budget At Work
The school department’s operating budget is primarily dedicated to supporting people and programs that directly serve students. As shown in the chart, nearly four-fifths of the budget (about 79%) is spent on Personnel Services, which includes salaries and benefits for teachers, educational support staff, administrators, and other employees who work with students every day. This reflects the people-centered nature of education and the importance of maintaining high-quality staff in our schools.
Beyond personnel, approximately 14% of the budget is used for the Purchase of Services, such as special education services, transportation, professional services, and other contracted supports that schools rely on to meet student needs.
Supplies and Materials account for just over 3% of the budget, funding classroom materials, instructional resources, technology supplies, and other items that support teaching and learning. Utilities represent about 3%, covering essential costs like electricity, heating, and water to keep school buildings safe and operational.
Finally, Operating Capital makes up less than 1% of the operating budget, supporting smaller-scale equipment purchases and replacements that help maintain daily school operations.
Overall, the operating budget reflects a strong commitment to investing in staff and services that have the greatest direct impact on students, while carefully managing the essential costs required to operate school facilities and programs.

|
F26 Operating Budget |
|
|---|---|
|
Personnel Services |
$ 48,158,724 |
|
Purchase of Services |
$ 8,307,750 |
|
Supplies & Materials |
$ 1,970,289 |
|
Other Charges & Expenses |
$ 150,653 |
|
Utilities |
$ 1,915,419 |
|
Operating Capital |
$ 377,500 |
|
Total |
$ 60,880,335 |
School Department FY2027 Proposed Operating Budget
Over the past several years, the District has faced ongoing structural underfunding, meaning that annual cost increases—such as contractual obligations, inflation, special education needs, and utilities—have consistently grown faster than available revenue. As shown in the accompanying graph, while budgets approved at Town Meeting have increased gradually over time, they have often fallen below the funding level required to fully support district services.
To balance the budget in recent years, the District has had to make difficult reductions and deferrals, including holding positions vacant, reducing programs or services, limiting supply purchases, and postponing investments in staffing and instructional resources. These actions allowed the District to remain fiscally responsible but also placed increasing strain on schools and staff.
- The funding levels presented in the FY26 operating budget are designed to clearly illustrate this challenge and the District’s strategy for addressing it.
- The Base FY26 budget and Funding Level 0 reflect the minimum funding required to sustain current services after years of cost containment and reductions.
- Funding Levels 1 and 2 begin to stabilize core services by addressing the most pressing gaps created by prior underfunding, particularly in personnel and student support services.
- Funding Levels 3 and 4 represent a longer-term approach, allowing the District to move beyond reactive cuts and toward sustainable investments that support consistent staffing, instructional quality, and operational reliability.
This graduated approach provides transparency about both where the District has been and where it is trying to go. Rather than proposing abrupt changes, the budget framework acknowledges past constraints while outlining a responsible path toward restoring stability and ensuring the District can continue to meet the needs of students, staff, and the community.
|
F26 Operating Budget |
Sustaining Current Services |
Stabilizing Core Services |
Long-Term Efficacy |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Funding Level 0 |
Funding Level 1 |
Funding Level 2 |
Funding Level 3 |
Funding Level 4 |
||
|
Personnel Services |
$ 48,158,724 |
$ 50,611,742 |
$ 51,331,742 |
$ 52,481,742 |
$ 53,136,742 |
$ 53,351,742 |
|
Purchase of Services |
$ 8,307,750 |
$ 8,393,400 |
$ 8,568,400 |
$ 8,583,400 |
$ 8,583,400 |
$ 8,583,400 |
|
Supplies & Materials |
$ 1,970,289 |
$ 2,192,123 |
$ 2,192,123 |
$ 2,192,123 |
$ 2,692,123 |
$ 2,692,123 |
|
Other Charges & Expenses |
$ 150,653 |
$ 140,219 |
$ 210,219 |
$ 210,219 |
$ 210,219 |
$ 210,219 |
|
Utilities |
$ 1,915,419 |
$ 1,965,899 |
$ 1,965,899 |
$ 1,965,899 |
$ 1,965,899 |
$ 1,965,899 |
|
Operating Capital |
$ 377,500 |
$ 795,000 |
$ 795,000 |
$ 795,000 |
$ 795,000 |
$ 795,000 |
|
Total |
$ 60,880,335 |
$ 64,098,383 |
$ 65,063,383 |
$ 66,228,383 |
$ 67,383,383 |
$ 67,598,383 |
|
Increase over F26 ($) |
- |
$ 3,218,048 |
$ 4,183,048 |
$ 5,348,048 |
$ 6,503,048 |
$ 6,718,048 |
|
Increase over F26 (%) |
- |
5.29% |
6.87% |
8.78% |
10.68% |
11.03% |
FY27 Budget Book Submitted to Finance & Warrant Committee March 2026
FY2027 Budget Book
School Operating Budget Request - Submitted to Dedham Finance & Warrant Committee - March 2026. Updated Edition: March 5, 2026
- SUPERINTENDENT’S MESSAGE
- DISTRICT STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
- FISCAL YEAR 2026 UPDATE
- FUNDING EDUCATION FOR DEDHAM’S YOUTH
- STATE AID - CHAPTER 70
- STATE AID - CIRCUIT BREAKER
- STATE AID - MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT
- GRANT FUNDING
- FY2027 SCHOOL DEPARTMENT PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
- FY27 BUDGET DRIVERS
- PERSONNEL
- EDUCATOR COMPENSATION
- ENROLLMENT
- PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES
- FY2027 FACILITIES PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
- CAPITAL BUDGET OVERVIEW
SUPERINTENDENT’S MESSAGE
It is my privilege as the Superintendent for Dedham Public Schools to present the Operating Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2027 (FY27). I am excited to be part of a community that is dedicated to providing exceptional education to our students. In the spirit of transparency and collaboration, I would like to take this opportunity to share our collective vision for the future of education in our District. This budget demonstrates our profound commitment to fostering an environment where every student can thrive academically, socially, and emotionally.
As we navigate the complexities of education, we must recognize the pivotal role of a well-thought-out budget while achieving our shared goals. This document embodies our commitment to delivering a high-quality education that prepares our Dedham students for the challenges and opportunities of the future. Key priorities of the proposed budget include:
- Investment in additional Direct Support Personnel to support the various learning needs of our youngest students to ensure our students have support grades 1 - 3 to achieve at high levels later,
- Investment in 21st Century Technology infrastructure,
- Restore, sustain and enhance best practices outlined in the District’s 5 year strategic plan.
The Dedham School Committee unanimously voted to approve this proposed budget at their meeting on February 3, 2026. This vote endorsed over three months of work within the District and the many hours of effort and deliberation contributed by the Budget Subcommittee guided by Chair Joshua Langmead. I greatly appreciate the Committee’s collective commitment to investing in our schools while balancing fiscal responsibility to Dedham tax payers. We are most grateful to our School Committee for their unwavering commitment to ensuring Dedham students receive the quality education the Community has come to expect and deserve. We also thank our Town Meeting members and our greater Dedham Community for supporting our continued commitment to "One Dedham."
This FY27 Budget was developed during the opening months of the 2025– 2026 school year and represents the District’s best forecast for funding necessary to begin to restore and sustain high quality educational programming for all students and to operate the District’s facilities and programs in an efficient and safe manner.
A level service budget represents an 5.29% increase over FY26 funding levels. After many hours of thoughtful deliberation, the Committee voted to support a 6.33.% increase for FY27. To achieve an 6.33% budget I have worked closely with our District Leadership Team to carefully identify target areas to begin to stabilize direct support to our youngest learners so they can achieve the foundational skills essential to content mastery.
While we are enthusiastic about the positive impact of our proposed budget, it is crucial to acknowledge the challenges we face. Economic uncertainties and evolving educational landscapes are realities that demand our collective attention and creativity. In navigating these challenges, we must prioritize maintaining the quality of education we provide.
We understand the importance of open dialogue and collaboration during this process. Your insights, questions, and feedback are invaluable as we work together to make decisions that will shape the future of education in our district. With your support and engagement, I am confident that we can overcome challenges and continue to provide the standard of education that our students not only deserve but require for future success.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and dedication to the success of the Dedham Public Schools.
DISTRICT STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
The mission of the Dedham Public Schools (DPS), in partnership with the broader community, is to promote excellence in learning, self-discipline, and motivation for all children. DPS strategic priorities remain aligned to this mission and fall into three broad categories: teaching and learning, student services, and finance and operations.
TEACHING AND LEARNING
The Office of Teaching & Learning is focused on helping both students and educators grow by defining clear expectations for high-quality instruction, using proven and inclusive teaching practices, and ensuring access to high-quality instructional materials. Our work centers on strengthening the instructional core, integrating Dedham’s Portrait of a Learner, and building systems that promote equitable academic opportunities for all students. Key efforts include:
- DPS Portrait of a Learner (POL) - We define and integrate Dedham’s Portrait of a Learner to establish a shared vision for the knowledge, skills, and dispositions students need for future success. The PoL anchors curriculum, instruction, and assessment, ensuring coherence and consistency across classrooms and grade levels while clarifying expectations for teaching and learning districtwide.
- Academic Support & Resources - We actively partner with educators to strengthen expertise in evaluating and implementing high-quality instructional materials and tiered supports. Our work ensures alignment and consistency of curriculum across grade levels while expanding equitable access to grade-level learning. Through clearly defined instructional expectations and vertically aligned systems, we provide targeted resources and interventions to support students in meeting academic standards.
- Professional Learning - We invest in high-quality, job-embedded professional learning that empowers teachers and school leaders with evidence-based strategies that drive student growth. Through collaborative structures such as professional learning communities, common planning time, data teams, department meetings, and instructional leadership teams, we cultivate a culture of continuous improvement and shared accountability for student success.
- Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) - We continuously refine and strengthen MTSS to remove barriers to student learning and ensure timely, targeted intervention. By monitoring student progress through collaborative data cycles and aligned professional learning structures, we support educators in delivering strong core instruction while responding effectively to diverse student needs.
STUDENT SERVICES
The Office of Student Services is committed to fostering an inclusive, equitable, and supportive learning environment where every student can thrive. Grounded in our commitment to the use of the best practices in specially designed instruction and research-based interventions, our work ensures that all students—regardless of ability, background, or circumstance—have access to the resources and opportunities they need to succeed.
The Student Services office oversees a comprehensive system of care that integrates special education, mental and behavioral health services, school nursing, homeless education (McKinney-Vento), Multi-Lingual Learning services, and civil rights protections to remove barriers to learning and promote student well-being. Key areas of focus include:
- Equity & Civil Rights – We actively work to eliminate disproportionality in student outcomes by addressing barriers related to race, language, disability, economic status, and other factors. Our programs and policies ensure compliance with Section 504, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and McKinney-Vento.
- Multilingual Learner (ML) Services – We support multilingual learners through high-quality language development programming aligned with WIDA standards and culturally responsive instructional practices. Services include English language development, collaborative consultation with general and special education staff, family engagement supports, and ongoing monitoring of student progress to ensure equitable access to curriculum, services, and opportunities across the district.
- Special Education & Inclusive Practices – We provide a continuum of services that includes multi-sensory, language-based instruction, specialized programs for autism and emotional disabilities, co-taught and inclusion models, and transition services for students with disabilities. Our goal is to meet diverse learning needs while maintaining a strong commitment to the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).
- Mental & Behavioral Health Services – Through a tiered system of support, we offer culturally affirming counseling, social work, school psychology, trauma-informed interventions, and evidence-based therapy models
- Wraparound & Family Support Services – We partner with community and university mental health providers, and school-based health initiatives to ensure students and families receive transition assistance, food security support, and access to medical and dental care.
- Health & Nursing Services – Our school nursing team provides traditional school nurse services, as well as preventative care, chronic disease case management, and emergency response, ensuring that students can engage fully in their education. We are expanding dental and medical partnerships to improve student health outcomes.
By integrating these services within a unified framework, we strive to create a district where all students—especially our more vulnerable students—are seen, valued, and supported in reaching their full potential.
FINANCE AND OPERATIONS
Strategic efforts in Finance and Operations for FY27 and beyond remain primarily focused on ensuring that the School Department’s budget maintains a high level of service for all students while growing at a rate that is consistent with town revenue growth, and that all seven of the District’s operational facilities remain structurally sound, safe, ADA compliant, and conducive to achieving the District’s strategic goals for teaching and learning.
FISCAL YEAR 2026 UPDATE
Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) has progressed in alignment with the assumptions embedded in the School Department’s approved operating budget. As of the close of the second quarter, the District remains in a stable financial position and is on track to close the fiscal year within its approved appropriation.
At the midpoint of the fiscal year, approximately 41% of the total operating budget has been expended, with an additional 6% encumbered for planned obligations. This leaves roughly 53% of the budget available for the remainder of the fiscal year. These spending patterns are consistent with historical trends and reflect predictable payroll cycles and front-loaded contractual obligations.
PERSONNEL
Salaries and wages continue to represent the largest share of the District’s operating budget. Across schools and departments, salary accounts are tracking in line with expectations, with the majority of locations maintaining between 60% and 65% of salary funds remaining at midyear. This reflects stable staffing levels and no material deviations from projected collective bargaining obligations.
The District continues to closely monitor staffing levels, vacancy patterns, and turnover to ensure that resources remain aligned with enrollment needs and programmatic priorities.
CONTRACTED SERVICES, TRANSPORTATION, AND UTILITIES
Several accounts, particularly within systemwide and facilities budgets reflect higher activity in the first half of the fiscal year. This is primarily due to:
- Transportation services
- Special education related contractual obligations
- Utilities
- Routine maintenance and operational contracts
These services are frequently front loaded or encumbered early in the fiscal year to ensure continuity of operations. While some line items show lower remaining balances, the majority of these funds are already encumbered and reflect planned, anticipated expenditures rather than unanticipated deficits.
Transportation and facilities related services remain areas of ongoing attention given continued market volatility and cost escalation across the Commonwealth. However, at this time, expenditures remain within manageable levels relative to the approved FY26 budget.
FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS
The Facilities budget reflects elevated activity in the first half of the fiscal year due to routine maintenance, contractual services, and operational supply needs. One facilities line item shows a temporary negative available balance; this variance is being actively managed through routine internal transfers and year end reconciliation planning.
The District’s proactive approach to monitoring building systems, utilities, and contracted services continues to mitigate the risk of larger capital exposures while preserving safe and functional learning environments for students and staff.
SCHOOL BASED BUDGETS
School level budgets at Dedham High School, Dedham Middle School, and the elementary schools are progressing consistently, with approximately 62–64% of funds remaining at midyear. This consistency across buildings reflects careful site based budget management and alignment with projected instructional and operational needs.
OVERALL OUTLOOK
At the conclusion of Quarter 2, the Dedham Public Schools remain in a stable financial position. Spending patterns are consistent with expectations, and no significant structural concerns have emerged at this time. Administration will continue to closely monitor high cost areas including transportation, special education services, and facilities operations and will keep the School Committee, Finance & Warrant Committee, and Town leadership informed of any material changes as we enter the second half of the fiscal year.
The FY27 budget has been developed with these midyear trends in mind, ensuring that ongoing operational realities, contractual obligations, and facility needs are responsibly reflected in next year’s financial plan.
FUNDING EDUCATION FOR DEDHAM’S YOUTH
FY26 FUNDING OVERVIEW
Funding the education of Dedham’s school-aged population is a complex undertaking supported by local, state, and federal sources. The operating and capital budgets appropriated by Town Meeting represent the primary source of funding for the School Department, accounting for approximately 80% of the resources required to operate the schools. The remaining 20% of funding for the School Department is composed of state aid (~17%) and grants (~3%).

|
Funding Source |
Amount |
|
|
Operating Budget |
$ 60,880,335.00 |
76.2% |
|
State Aid |
$ 14,099,200.00 |
17.7% |
|
State Grants |
$ 2,497,665.00 |
3.1% |
|
Capital |
$ 2,374,000.00 |
3.0% |
|
Total |
$ 79,851,200.00 |
|
OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS
The Town has consistently demonstrated its commitment to attracting and retaining highly competent faculty and staff through highly competitive compensation for faculty and staff, to maintaining class sizes consistent with the community’s expectations, to ensuring that students in grades 6-12 have access to a wide range of Advanced Placement and elective courses, and to ensuring that all children have access to the specialized services they need to find success in school and life. This ongoing commitment is demonstrated through the operating and capital funds that are appropriated annually through Town Meeting and provide approximately 80% of the funds necessary to operate the School Department.
STATE AID
State aid for education comes from a number of sources within the Commonwealth’s annual budget appropriation. The primary source of funding via the state’s budget is Chapter 70. In Fiscal Year 2026, Chapter 70 provided approximately $10.3 million in educational funding to the Town of Dedham. The second major source of state aid is Circuit Breaker. Circuit Breaker funds are allocated directly to school districts and are a reimbursement for eligible special education tuition and transportation costs incurred in the previous fiscal year. In Fiscal Year 2026 Circuit Breaker reimbursement provided approximately $3.5 million that the District uses to offset costs associated with out-of-district special education tuition and transportation.
GRANT FUNDING
Grant funding comes to the School Department in two primary categories; entitlement grants and competitive grants. Entitlement grants are funds that the District receives annually as a function of federal statutes and funding mechanisms under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Entitlement grants in Fiscal Year 2026 provided the District with approximately $1.7 million. Competitive grants are funds that Districts can apply for and are awarded on the merit and quality of their applications. Assistant Superintendents Smith and Stetson have pursued and been awarded multiple competitive grants that provide $839,000 in funding to support curriculum programming, professional development, mental health services, and a number of other initiatives that would not otherwise be possible.
STATE AID - CHAPTER 70
Chapter 70 is the primary program through which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts provides state aid to public school districts. Its purpose is to ensure that every community has the financial resources needed to provide students with an adequate education, regardless of local property wealth. The formula first calculates a district’s “foundation budget,” which represents the minimum spending level the state believes is necessary to educate its students, based on factors such as enrollment, grade levels, and specific student needs (including low-income students, English learners, and students with disabilities). It then determines how much of that amount the local community is expected to contribute, based largely on its property values and income levels. The state provides Chapter 70 aid to help cover the difference.
Because communities vary widely in their ability to raise revenue through local taxes, Chapter 70 is designed to promote equity across the state. Districts in communities with lower property wealth generally receive a larger share of their foundation budget from the state, while wealthier communities are expected to fund a greater portion locally. In addition to ensuring a minimum level of school funding, Chapter 70 also includes annual provisions that guarantee every district receives at least a minimum increase in aid from one year to the next.
In FY26, the Town of Dedham received $10,309,258.00 in Chapter 70 state education aid. These funds are intended to help cities and towns support schools, while also providing an incentive for them to establish a Foundation Budget, a required contribution, and a net school spending limit as a critical part of the funding formula.
Dedham has consistently exceeded the Foundation Budget established for the Town as well as the required contribution amount and thus receives its full share of Chapter 70 funds. In the Governor’s proposed budget for FY27, Dedham is positioned to receive $10,428,974.00, an estimated $119,716.00 increase over the FY26 state appropriation.
In the months ahead the Governor’s proposed budget will proceed through:
► House Ways & Means Budget
► House Debate
► House Budget
► Senate Ways & Means Budget
► Senate Debate
► Senate Budget
► Conference Committee
► Final Budget
While these Chapter 70 funds do not come directly to the School Department, they can be used by the Town to help offset the School Department’s proposed budget increase for FY27.
STATE AID - CIRCUIT BREAKER
WHAT IS CIRCUIT BREAKER?
Circuit Breaker is a special reimbursement mechanism adopted by the state in 2004. Circuit Breaker reimburses districts for a portion of eligible expenses associated with out-of-district tuitions and transportation. The Dedham School Department submits detailed expense records to the State annually and receives reimbursement for a percentage of eligible expenses in the following fiscal year.
HOW DOES CIRCUIT BREAKER WORK?
The State establishes a Circuit Breaker threshold annually. All expenses for out of district tuition and transportation below the threshold are the responsibility of the District. Expenses for those same services beyond the threshold are eligible for reimbursement from the state’s circuit breaker funding mechanism. This threshold helps districts understand the portion of a child’s out of district tuition and transportation costs that are eligible for reimbursement. Up to 75% of eligible out of district tuition and transportation costs can be reimbursed depending on funding available via the State’s budget.
|
Current Circuit Breaker Reimbursement Example |
|
|
Out of District Student Tuition |
$100,000 |
|
State Established Threshold |
$51,500 |
|
Tuition Eligible for Circuit Breaker Reimbursement ($100,000 tuition - $51,500 Circuit Breaker Threshold) |
$48,500 |
|
Final Estimated Reimbursement to District (75% of $48,500 Eligible Tuition) |
$36,375 |
HOW DOES THE DISTRICT USE CIRCUIT BREAKER?
Costs associated with out-of-district placements can shift suddenly and significantly in a given year subsequent to the school department’s budget development and approval process. The state’s Operational Services Division (OSD) may establish increases to state-approved tuition rates, students requiring out of district placements may move in, and/or students currently attending Dedham schools may develop needs that require out-of-district placement.
The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) regulations allow communities to carry forward up to the total Circuit Breaker reimbursement amount for one fiscal year. The fund is structured this way to encourage communities to build balances in their Circuit Breaker accounts so that, in years when special education expenses increase suddenly or the reimbursement rate is lower than 75%, there will be sufficient funds available to cover most, if not all unforeseen costs.
Both DESE and the Department of Revenue’s Division of Local Services (DLS) recommend that in years when special education costs are consistent with what is budgeted, districts should build a Circuit Breaker balance to mitigate the future risks involved in these highly volatile expenses.
HOW MUCH ASSISTANCE DOES CIRCUIT BREAKER PROVIDE THE DISTRICT?
The District estimates $2.9 million in FY27 Circuit Breaker reimbursement funding for eligible costs associated with the out-of-district special education placements for 43 students. In FY26, Dedham is projected to receive reimbursement totaling approximately $3.5 million for eligible tuition and transportation. These projected revenues are used to offset tuition and transportation costs embedded in the FY26 budget request.
|
DPS SPECIAL EDUCATION CIRCUIT BREAKER REIMBURSEMENT HISTORY |
|||||
|
Fiscal Year |
Eligible Students Claimed |
Total Eligible Expenses |
Net Claim |
Payment |
Increase/ Decrease |
|
26 |
52 |
$ 7,696,448.00 |
$ 4,970,660.00 |
$ 3,539,942.00 |
$ 429,848.00 |
|
25 |
52 |
$ 7,325,071.00 |
$ 4,635,579.00 |
$ 3,110,094.00 |
$ 818,789.00 |
|
24 |
44 |
$ 5,445,807.00 |
$ 3,268,071.00 |
$ 2,291,305.00 |
$ 306,338.00 |
|
23 |
42 |
$ 4,635,860.00 |
$ 2,646,610.00 |
$ 1,984,967.00 |
$ 425,262.00 |
|
22 |
54 |
$ 4,041,160.00 |
$ 2,079,599.00 |
$ 1,559,705.00 |
$ 181,320.00 |
STATE AID - MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT
The Dedham School Department routinely generates additional revenue to the Town’s General Fund in the form of reimbursements from the School-based Medicaid Program. Some services provided by school personnel (mainly in the form of psychological and counseling services) can be billed to Medicaid. These reimbursements must be carefully tracked and recorded by the school personnel providing these services.
The Dedham Public Schools’ Office of Finance and Operations has aggressively pursued reimbursement of these federal funds over the past eight years. Due to the complexity of these reimbursements, the Dedham school department has paid for the services of an outside vendor to provide expertise in this area, helping to ensure that the maximum amount is received by the Town. In return, this tracking and back-billing of Medicaid qualifying services annually generates more than a quarter million dollars in revenue returned to the Town’s General Fund.
|
DPS MEDICAID REVENUE & BILLING OVERVIEW – 5 YEAR HISTORY |
|||
|
Medicaid Revenue |
Collection Fees |
Net Revenue to Town |
|
|
2025 |
$ 371,628.00 |
$ 17,134.00 |
$ 354,494.00 |
|
2024 |
$ 256,211.12 |
$ 8,468.82 |
$ 247,742.30 |
|
2023 |
$ 263,651.82 |
$ 9,354.51 |
$ 254,297.31 |
|
2022 |
$ 566,983.00 |
$ 35,268.00 |
$ 531,715.00 |
|
2021 |
$ 298,013.00 |
$ 7,269.00 |
$ 290,744.00 |
GRANT FUNDING
The District benefits from supplemental funding via entitlement and competitive grants. Entitlement grants are distributions from State and Federal funding mechanisms established by law. These two statutory funding sources are the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Competitive grants come from state agencies, non-profits, for profit organizations, and other philanthropic sources. Unlike entitlement grants, these competitive grants are awarded based on the merit of the application proactively submitted by members of the District Leadership Team.
|
Funding Source |
Type |
FY26 |
|
ST Math |
Competitive Grant |
$ 220,000.00 |
|
Innovation Career Pathways Implementation & Support Grant |
Competitive Grant |
$ 56,635.00 |
|
MyCAP Planning and Implementation Grant |
Competitive Grant |
$ 14,000.00 |
|
Promoting Safe & Healthy Learning Environments - Option 1 |
Competitive Grant |
$ 40,000.00 |
|
Promoting Safe & Healthy Learning Environments - Option 2D |
Competitive Grant |
$ 67,500.00 |
|
Comprehensive School Health Services |
Competitive Grant |
$ 95,000.00 |
|
Department of Public Health |
Competitive Grant |
$ 90,366.21 |
|
Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital |
Competitive Grant |
$ 128,000.00 |
|
Supporting Students' Social-Emotional Learning, Behavioral and Mental Health, and Wellness |
Competitive Grant |
$ 44,700.00 |
|
Investigating History |
Competitive Grant |
$ 33,500.00 |
|
Career Connected Grant |
Competitive Grant |
$ 35,000.00 |
|
One8 Foundation (Applied Learning Leadership) Discovery Program |
Competitive Grant |
$ 14,400.00 |
|
Title I |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 391,805.00 |
|
Title IIA |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 65,176.00 |
|
Title III |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 32,818.00 |
|
Title IVA |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 24,715.00 |
|
IDEA |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 1,113,800.00 |
|
Early Childhood |
Entitlement Grant |
$ 30,250.00 |
FY2027 SCHOOL DEPARTMENT PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
The FY27 budget continues the District’s work to strengthen financial controls, improve account alignment, and ensure that recurring obligations are fully reflected in the operating budget. Adjustments in this category may include the annualization of prior-year staffing additions, shifts from grant funding to operating support where applicable, and refinements to budgeting methodologies to ensure transparency and sustainability.
LEVEL SERVICE BUDGET
The annual budget development process begins with the articulation of a level service budget. The level service budget reflects the cost of operations to maintain the same level and quality of service in the next fiscal year. The level service budget factors predictable increases to fixed costs for personnel, goods, and service as well as estimated cost increases for personnel costs associated with unsettled collective bargaining agreements and service contracts that will be renewed during the budget development process. When all of these factors are considered, a level service budget for FY27 would require a 5.29% increase over the FY26 appropriation.
FY27 PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
The FY27 proposed operating budget reflects careful planning and strategic efforts to balance the District’s ability to maintain excellence in educational programming for students while working within the reasonable and real limitations of the Town’s budget and overall levy capacity. The FY27 proposed operating budget request includes an 6.33% increase over FY26 driven primarily by:
- Collective bargaining obligations for wage increases with all represented employees
- Inflationary increases in the costs of general goods and services
- Technology infrastructure reinvestment
- Projected higher than normal increases in transportation services
- Additional personnel to provide direct academic support to students in Grades K-3
|
OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST OVERVIEW |
|||
|
Education |
Facilities |
TOTAL |
|
|
FY26 Final Budget |
$55,210,099 |
$5,670,236 |
$60,880,335 |
|
Proposed FY27 Budget |
$58,841,165 |
$5,892,895 |
$64,734,060 |
|
Increase ($) |
$3,631,066 |
$222,659 |
$3,853,725 |
|
Increase (%) |
6.58% |
3.93% |
6.33% |
|
DPS OVERALL BUDGET – 5 YEAR HISTORY |
||||||
|
TOTAL BUDGET |
FY23 |
FY24 |
FY25 |
FY26 |
F27 |
5-YR AVG |
|
$50,622,385 |
$54,138,675 |
$58,558,235 |
$60,880,335 |
$64,734,060 |
$56,247,200 |
|
|
Change |
$2,072,876 |
$3,516,290 |
$4,419,560 |
$2,322,100 |
$3,853,725 |
$3,014,722 |
|
Percent |
4.27% |
6.95% |
8.16% |
3.97% |
6.33% |
5.63% |
|
DPS OVERALL BUDGET BREAKDOWN – 5 YEAR HISTORY |
||||||
|
FY23 |
FY 24 |
FY25 |
FY26 |
FY27 |
5-YR AVG |
|
|
EDUCATION |
||||||
|
Approved Budget |
$46,321,576 |
$49,408,896 |
$53,051,523 |
$55,210,099 |
$58,841,165 |
$49,672,660 |
|
Change From Prior Year |
$1,950,370 |
$3,087,320 |
$3,642,627 |
$2,158,576 |
$3,631,066 |
$2,526,621 |
|
Percent Change |
4.40% |
6.66% |
7.37% |
4.07% |
6.58% |
5.55% |
|
FACILITIES |
||||||
|
Approved Budget |
$4,300,809 |
$4,729,779 |
$5,506,711 |
$5,670,236 |
$5,892,895 |
$5,046,456 |
|
Change From Prior Year |
$122,506 |
$428,970 |
$776,932 |
$163,525 |
$222,659 |
$320,300 |
|
Percent Change |
2.93% |
9.97% |
16.43% |
2.97% |
3.93% |
6.49% |
FY27 BUDGET DRIVERS
PERSONNEL $3,088,017 5.07%
Salaries and wages continue to represent approximately 80% of the District’s overall operating budget. The primary driver within this category reflects contractual salary obligations established through collective bargaining agreements, step and lane movement, and projected wage adjustments for unsettled contracts.
The FY27 budget also reflects continued efforts to align staffing levels with enrollment trends, maintain appropriate student-to-teacher ratios, and ensure that specialized programming and student support services remain adequately staffed. As in prior years, personnel costs remain the single largest driver of year-over-year budget growth.
K-3 LITERACY $480,000 +.08%
The FY27 budget includes a strategic investment of $635,000 to strengthen early literacy in grades K–3, recognizing that foundational reading and math skills are critical predictors of long-term academic success. These resources are targeted to expand instructional support, enhance evidence-based practices, and provide additional staffing and materials that enable educators to deliver focused, data-informed instruction to all students during the early elementary years.
STUDENT SERVICES $155,000 +.02%
The FY27 budget includes a targeted investment of $155,000 to add two special education teachers, strengthening the district’s capacity to meet the diverse learning needs of students requiring specialized services. This investment supports smaller instructional groupings, more individualized instruction, and improved compliance with students’ Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).
TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATE $420,000 +.07%
The FY27 budget reflects updated projections for necessary technology investments to sustain the general operation of the District and teaching and learning K-12. Desktop machines at DMS are two (2) years beyond useful life expectancy and require replacement. Likewise approximately 700 student chromebooks also require replacement for the coming school year.
PERSONNEL
STAFFING OVERVIEW
Dedham Public Schools employs approximately 635 employees of which 460 (86%) are educators and instructional support personnel. 535 employees (85% of all employees) are funded by the School Department’s operating budget. The remaining 100 employees (15% of all employees) are funded through revolving and grant funds.
Salaries and wages for all employees represent ~78% of the District’s overall FY27 proposed operating budget. The table provides a detailed summary of faculty and staff funded by the School Department’s operating budget by budget reporting category over the most recent five year period.
|
Faculty & Staffing Trends by Category |
|||||
|
2023 |
2024 |
2025* |
2026* |
2027 |
|
|
General Education |
206.9 |
208.9 |
202.8 |
200.1 |
213.9 |
|
Special Education |
191.8 |
185.8 |
214 |
220 |
218 |
|
Instructional Support |
34.5 |
39 |
38.6 |
39.6 |
39.6 |
|
Operations |
15 |
16 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
|
Policy & Admin |
30.6 |
28 |
37.2 |
32.8 |
32.8 |
|
Custodial & Maintenance |
32.5 |
27.5 |
27.5 |
||
|
Total |
478.8 |
477.7 |
540.1 |
535 |
546.8 |
*METHODOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENTS OF NOTE
It is important to note that the District employed a series of methodological changes in preparing the FY26 budget. One of these adjustments to the budgeting process included reconstruction of all personnel and non-peronnel accounts that comprise the budget. Through this process the District learned that the historical data reported in the Staffing Trends table was generally accurate but did not reflect all budget reporting categories, types of employees, or any employees not assigned to a budget reporting category.
As such the District has (1) ensured that all employees are coded to a budget reporting category and (2) adjusted the data in the Staffing Trends table to reflect all reporting categories and all employee roles funded by the operating budget.
The resulting differential between FY24 (477.7 FTE) and the current FY26 budget proposal (535 FTE) was 58.7 FTE. The 58.7 FTE differential is the sum of accounting for 27 FTE custodial/maintenance staff, correcting 10 FTE that did not carry forward from previous fiscal years, and assigning 21.7 FTE to budget reporting categories that were not historically reported.
STAFFING DETAILS AND TRENDS
The current FY26 personnel distribution reflects the district’s continued prioritization of direct services to students. Approximately 87.8% of district personnel provide direct instructional services and support. The remaining 12.2% serve in non-student-facing roles that support school operations and district leadership. This distribution highlights the district’s effort to allocate the majority of staffing resources to positions that directly impact teaching, learning, and student support.

Within the non-student-facing category, the largest share of personnel is dedicated to Custodial and Maintenance services (6.3%), underscoring the operational importance of maintaining safe, clean, and functional school facilities. Traffic Directors account for 2.8% of employees supporting safe arrival and dismissal procedures across schools. Administrative and leadership roles make up a smaller portion of this group, including Principals (1.3%), Executive Assistants (0.9%), and Superintendent/Assistant Superintendents (0.9%). Together, these roles provide the organizational leadership, administrative coordination, and operational infrastructure necessary to sustain effective school operations while allowing the majority of district staff to remain focused on direct student engagement.
EDUCATOR COMPENSATION
HOW DOES EDUCATOR COMPENSATION WORK?
In Massachusetts, most public school teachers are paid according to a salary schedule, sometimes called a step-and-lane pay scale, that is negotiated through collective bargaining between the local school district and the teachers’ union. The schedule typically has “steps,” which represent years of experience, and “lanes,” which represent levels of education or graduate credits earned (for example: Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree, or Master’s plus additional graduate coursework). As teachers gain experience each year, they usually move up one step, increasing their salary. If they earn additional graduate credits or advanced degrees, they may move across to a higher lane, which also increases pay.
The system is designed to create predictable and transparent compensation across a district. Teachers with the same experience and education level earn the same base salary regardless of the school where they work, though pay levels differ from district to district based on local contracts and budgets. In addition to the base salary schedule, teachers may receive stipends for extra responsibilities such as coaching, advising clubs, or taking on leadership roles, and some districts offer additional compensation for hard-to-fill positions or advanced professional credentials.
WHAT IS DEDHAM’S NEGOTIATED SALARY SCHEDULE FOR EDUCATORS?
|
Nurses |
Bachelors |
Masters |
Masters +30 Graduate Credits |
Masters +60 Graduate Credits |
Doctorate |
|
|
1 |
$ 61,713 |
$ 62,846 |
$ 69,457 |
$ 72,775 |
$ 76,085 |
$ 79,387 |
|
2 |
$ 63,667 |
$ 64,835 |
$ 72,121 |
$ 75,423 |
$ 78,731 |
$ 82,030 |
|
3 |
$ 65,607 |
$ 66,813 |
$ 74,757 |
$ 78,065 |
$ 81,368 |
$ 84,669 |
|
4 |
$ 68,203 |
$ 69,457 |
$ 77,401 |
$ 80,710 |
$ 84,023 |
$ 87,326 |
|
5 |
$ 72,762 |
$ 74,103 |
$ 82,185 |
$ 85,564 |
$ 88,933 |
$ 92,305 |
|
6 |
$ 75,406 |
$ 76,801 |
$ 84,887 |
$ 88,266 |
$ 91,627 |
$ 95,002 |
|
7 |
$ 78,035 |
$ 79,487 |
$ 87,587 |
$ 90,951 |
$ 94,314 |
$ 97,690 |
|
8 |
$ 82,331 |
$ 83,855 |
$ 92,282 |
$ 94,625 |
$ 98,000 |
$ 101,377 |
|
9 |
$ 83,512 |
$ 85,061 |
$ 93,612 |
$ 99,023 |
$ 101,374 |
$ 104,747 |
|
10 |
$ 86,331 |
$ 87,935 |
$ 96,786 |
$ 100,457 |
$ 105,742 |
$ 109,124 |
|
11 |
$ 88,398 |
$ 90,040 |
$ 99,116 |
$ 103,873 |
$ 107,275 |
$ 110,703 |
|
12 |
$ 92,386 |
$ 94,070 |
$ 103,373 |
$ 106,377 |
$ 110,931 |
$ 114,481 |
|
13 |
$ 97,890 |
$ 99,574 |
$ 108,874 |
$ 110,814 |
$ 113,617 |
$ 117,254 |
|
14 |
$ 116,319 |
$ 118,237 |
$ 121,964 |
|||
|
15 |
$ 123,740 |
$ 127,468 |
WHERE ARE DEDHAM EDUCATORS PLACED ON THE SALARY SCHEDULE?
The FY26 teacher salary distribution reflects a workforce of ~320.8 full-time equivalent (FTE) educators with total step salary obligations of $34.34 million. Based on these totals, the average salary per FTE is approximately $107,000, reflecting the district’s overall experience level and the structure of the negotiated salary schedule. A significant portion of salary expenditures is concentrated among teachers in the upper-middle steps of the schedule, particularly Steps 10–12, which together account for 48.6 FTE and a substantial share of total salary costs. Step 12 alone represents the largest individual step category, with 19.5 FTE and $1.96 million in salary expenditures.
|
Step |
Educators (#) |
Step Salary Total ($) |
|
2 |
7.0 |
$ 491,056.44 |
|
3 |
7.0 |
$ 515,723.53 |
|
4 |
9.0 |
$ 697,420.32 |
|
5 |
10.0 |
$ 800,678.48 |
|
6 |
9.0 |
$ 776,937.80 |
|
7 |
10.0 |
$ 979,700.64 |
|
8 |
13.0 |
$ 1,200,180.08 |
|
9 |
7.5 |
$ 687,386.29 |
|
10 |
14.6 |
$ 1,449,710.50 |
|
11 |
14.5 |
$ 1,477,933.67 |
|
12 |
19.5 |
$ 1,960,521.29 |
|
13 |
9.0 |
$ 1,008,846.28 |
|
14 |
1.0 |
$ 119,396.34 |
|
Top Step |
189.7 |
$ 22,172,031.70 |
The data also indicates a highly experienced workforce, as relatively fewer educators are concentrated in the early career steps. Steps 2–4 collectively account for 23 FTE, while a larger share of staff appear in mid-career and advanced steps such as 5–9 and 10–12. Additionally, a large portion of staff (189.7 FTE) are compensated at the maximum step, representing $22.17 million, or roughly 65% of total teacher salary expenditures. This distribution is indicative of strong staff retention and a veteran teaching workforce.
HOW DOES DEDHAM’S SALARY SCHEDULE COMPARE TO OTHER DISTRICTS?
The District has established 42 comparison districts. Comparison districts are broken into two categories:
(1) Talent Competitive - districts within a 45 minute commute,
(2) RADAR - Economic/Demographic - RADAR is a benchmarking tool maintained by DESE
Dedham is a top-tier district for starting and mid-career salaries across nearly all comparison groups and educational categories. The District holds the number one rank for Step 1 salaries in the Bachelors ($61,613), Masters ($68,095), and Masters +60 ($74,593) lanes. This competitive edge remains strong at Step 5, where Dedham maintains the top rank for Masters-level teachers and the second-highest rank for those in the Bachelors and Masters +30 categories. These rankings indicate that Dedham is positioned as a market leader in attracting and retaining talent during the early to middle stages of a teacher's career path.
While still highly competitive, the District typically falls to between the 6th and 9th rank at the "Top Step" of the salary scale. For example, in the Masters lane, Dedham drops from 1st place at Step 5 to 9th place at the Top Step, with its $106,740 salary trailing behind districts like Wellesley and Brookline. Despite this relative dip at the top end of the scale, Dedham’s compensation remains significantly higher than most districts in the comparison group.
Detailed compensation comparison charts can be found in Appendix B.
ENROLLMENT
The Dedham School Department continuously monitors student enrollments to inform staffing patterns and associated fiscal impact year over year. Enrollments for the 2025 - 2026 school year decreased by 107 students (~4%) over the previous school year’s enrollment of 2,668, bringing the current student enrollment in Dedham Public Schools to 2,561 students as of January 2025.
AVERAGE CLASS SIZES
Average class sizes are an important consideration in maintaining the quality of PK-12 programming throughout the District and are a key driver of per-pupil expenditures associated with ensuring excellence in that programming. The average class size data below provides direct insight into how many students one could expect to find in a classroom anywhere in the District with a certified lead teacher.
|
ELEMENTARY CLASS SIZES GRADES K - 5 |
||
|
Sections |
Average Class Size |
|
|
Kindergarten |
12 |
17.1 |
|
Grade 1 |
12 |
18.3 |
|
Grade 2 |
12 |
18.4 |
|
Grade 3 |
11 |
20.3 |
|
Grade 4 |
12 |
18.8 |
|
Grade 5 |
11 |
20.2 |
|
UPPER SCHOOL CLASS SIZES GRADES 6-12 |
||
|
DMS |
DHS |
|
|
English |
18 |
17 |
|
Mathematics |
16 |
16 |
|
History and Social Sciences |
18 |
19 |
|
Science |
18 |
18 |
|
World Language |
18 |
15 |
|
Fine and Performing Arts |
17 |
17 |
|
Computer Science |
17 |
19 |
|
Health and Physical Education |
21 |
18 |
|
Technology and Engineering |
17 |
- |
|
Occupational Ed. |
- |
18 |
STUDENT TO TEACHER RATIOS
Student to teacher ratios are another metric used by the school department to review and calibrate staffing patterns relative to geographically and demographically similar communities. Student to teacher ratios are different from class size averages in that they consider all instructional staff (i.e. guidance counselors, special educators, paraprofessionals, etc.) relative to the overall population of students.
While class size averages provide insight into what classrooms generally look like, the student:teacher ratio is a metric that provides insight into the level of adult support available to students throughout the district. Low student:teacher ratios equate to high levels of support for students.
|
District |
Student:Teacher Ratio |
Comparison Basis |
|
Dedham |
11 : 1 |
- |
|
Ayer-Shirley |
11 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Stoneham |
11 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Northampton |
11.5 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Norwood |
12 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Westwood |
12 : 1 |
Geographic |
|
Foxborough |
12.5 : 1 |
FWC Request |
|
Norton |
12.5 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Needham |
13 : 1 |
Geographic |
|
Bellingham |
13 : 1 |
Demographic |
|
Medfield |
13 : 1 |
FWC Request |
|
Canton |
14 : 1 |
Geographic |
|
Milton |
14 : 1 |
Geographic |
|
Amesbury |
16 : 1 |
Demographic |
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS IN ENROLLMENT
Over the past two decades, Dedham’s total district enrollment has experienced a gradual decline, moving from a peak of 2,897 students in the 2005-06 school year to 2,561 in 2025-26. While there were periods of fluctuation, such as a minor peak of 2,910 students in 2009-10, the overall trend has been a contraction of the student body by approximately 11.6% since 2005.
Simultaneously, the demographic profile of the district has undergone a profound transformation, becoming increasingly diverse. The percentage of students identifying as White decreased from 84.6% in 2005-06 to 64.6% in 2025-26. Concurrently, the Hispanic or Latino population nearly tripled, rising from 6.8% to 18.1%, and the Black or African American population grew from 5.1% to 8.3%. Students identifying as Multi-Race, Not Hispanic or Latino, also saw substantial growth, increasing from just 0.7% to 6.0% during this timeframe. These shifts indicate a steady move toward a thriving, diverse student body that is representative of the broader community.
|
Academic Year |
Total Enrollment |
White (%) |
Hispanic or Latino (%) |
Black or African American (%) |
Asian (%) |
|
2025-26 |
2,561 |
64.6% |
18.1% |
8.3% |
2.9% |
|
2024-25 |
2,668 |
62.8% |
19.1% |
9.9% |
2.6% |
|
2023-24 |
2,699 |
64.9% |
18.5% |
8.8% |
2.4% |
|
2022-23 |
2,555 |
67.8% |
17.0% |
7.7% |
2.3% |
|
2021-22 |
2,567 |
67.8% |
17.1% |
7.3% |
2.3% |
|
2020-21 |
2,556 |
69.1% |
16.1% |
7.2% |
2.3% |
|
2019-20 |
2,736 |
69.3% |
15.9% |
7.5% |
2.5% |
|
2018-19 |
2,687 |
69.6% |
16.0% |
7.3% |
2.6% |
|
2017-18 |
2,658 |
71.3% |
14.6% |
7.1% |
2.7% |
|
2016-17 |
2,693 |
71.1% |
14.0% |
7.9% |
2.7% |
|
2015-16 |
2,747 |
72.7% |
13.1% |
7.2% |
2.8% |
|
2014-15 |
2,776 |
73.8% |
12.2% |
7.3% |
3.0% |
|
2013-14 |
2,818 |
74.7% |
11.5% |
7.2% |
3.0% |
|
2012-13 |
2,826 |
76.7% |
10.3% |
6.8% |
3.0% |
|
2011-12 |
2,862 |
77.3% |
10.4% |
6.5% |
3.0% |
|
2010-11 |
2,879 |
77.6% |
10.2% |
6.5% |
3.3% |
|
2009-10 |
2,910 |
79.1% |
9.1% |
6.7% |
2.8% |
|
2008-09 |
2,857 |
81.2% |
8.1% |
5.8% |
2.8% |
|
2007-08 |
2,879 |
83.1% |
7.2% |
5.9% |
2.4% |
|
2006-07 |
2,871 |
84.3% |
6.8% |
5.4% |
2.2% |
|
2005-06 |
2,897 |
84.6% |
6.8% |
5.1% |
2.3% |
HIGH NEEDS ENROLLMENT TRENDS
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) defines “high needs students” as an unduplicated subgroup of students who fall into at least one of several categories associated with increased educational need. Specifically, a student is considered high needs if they are economically disadvantaged, an English learner (including current or former English language learners), or a student with disabilities. The designation is used in state accountability and reporting systems to track achievement gaps and target resources and support to students who may require additional academic, linguistic, or social-emotional support to succeed in school. Because the measure is unduplicated, a student who belongs to multiple categories is counted only once within the overall high-needs subgroup.
The District has experienced a significant shift in selected high needs populations over the last two decades. Since the 2005-06 school year, the percentage of English Learners has grown from 3.5% to 6.1%, while the Low Income (formerly Economically Disadvantaged) population has risen from 16.2% to 26.2%. This trend suggests a diversifying student body that requires increasing resources to provide appropriate educational, social, and emotional support.
The most prominent trend is the sustained and above-average percentage of Students with Disabilities. In 2005-06, this population accounted for 18.7% of the district, already exceeding the state average of 16.4%. By 2025-26, this figure climbed to 24.0%, significantly outpacing the state average of 21.1%. This long-term upward trajectory indicates that Dedham serves an increasingly high number of students with specialized educational needs compared to its peers across Massachusetts. Consequently, the High Needs category—which aggregates students who are low income, English learners, or have disabilities—remains high at 42.4%, reflecting a complex student profile that necessitates robust funding for special education staffing, specialized instructional materials, and inclusive programming.
Dedham Public Schools - High Needs Populations 2006 - 2026

For the FY27 budget, these data points underscore the necessity of maintaining or expanding investments in student support services. While some metrics, like English Learners and Low Income, saw slight dips in the most recent 2025-26 data compared to their peaks in 2024-25, the overall twenty-year trend is one of expansion. The persistent growth in the enrollment of students with complex educational needs represents a fixed and increasing demand for district resources that must be prioritized to ensure compliance with individualized education programs and to maintain the high standard of equitable education for all Dedham students.
PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES
PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES OVERVIEW
Per-pupil expenditure is a commonly used measure for understanding the overall cost of educating students in a school district. The figure is calculated by dividing the district’s total operating expenditures by the number of students enrolled, expressed as full-time equivalent (FTE) students. The resulting number represents the average amount spent per student to operate the school system.
Operating expenditures include the costs necessary to run the district’s educational programs and services. These typically include salaries and benefits for teachers and staff, instructional materials, transportation, student support services, building operations and maintenance, and administrative functions.
Per-pupil expenditures can change from year to year for a variety of reasons. Increases in staffing costs, contractual salary adjustments, health insurance costs, and inflation in operational expenses can raise total expenditures. Changes in student enrollment also affect the calculation. If enrollment decreases while expenditures remain stable or increase, the per-pupil amount will rise. Conversely, enrollment growth can spread costs across more students and moderate the per-pupil figure.
Per-pupil expenditure is a descriptive measure that reflects the relationship between the district’s overall spending and the number of students served. Differences in per-pupil spending between districts can reflect a variety of factors, including enrollment levels, program offerings, staffing patterns, class sizes, facility configurations, and local community priorities.
As a result, per-pupil expenditure is most useful when considered alongside other indicators such as enrollment trends, staffing levels, program offerings, and the educational services provided to students. Together, these factors provide a more complete picture of how resources are used to support teaching and learning in the District.
DEDHAM'S PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES
Dedham's per-pupil expenditures are among the highest in Norfolk County spending $27,128.50 per-pupil. These costs are driven primarily by:
- High Needs Enrollment Growth
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) defines “high needs students” as an unduplicated group of students who are economically disadvantaged, English learners (current or former), or students with disabilities. Over the past two decades, the district has experienced notable growth in several of these populations, including increases in English learners and low-income students, reflecting a more diverse student body with expanding support needs.
- Student-Teacher Ratio and Class Size
Dedham maintains a ratio of 11.0:1. This is notably lower than many communities in Norfolk County. This ratio indicates a higher investment in staffing relative to the student population. Dedham maintains average class sizes of ~18 students in all grades and courses K-12.
- Competitive Compensation and Veteran Workforce
Dedham’s compensation for educators is highly competitive in the region and our students benefit from highly experienced educators.
- Underutilized and Aging Facilities
The 2025 Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) School Survey Report indicates that Dedham’s current utilization rate is 63%. The MSBA calculates utilization as a ratio comparing current enrollment to the total enrollment capacity of the District’s existing facilities. The average age of Dedham's school buildings is 58.6 years. Older facilities require more significant capital and maintenance investments than newer buildings.
Dedham’s per-pupil expenditures reflect the District’s overall educational model and infrastructure rather than any single budgetary decision. A lower student-teacher ratio and consistently small class sizes require a greater number of educators relative to enrollment, increasing the level of staffing needed to operate the district’s instructional program. At the same time, competitive compensation and a highly experienced workforce represent a continued and significant investment in attracting and retaining high-quality educators.
Facilities also play an important role in the District’s overall cost structure. With current enrollment utilizing approximately 63% of available building capacity and an average building age of nearly six decades, Dedham must maintain and operate a larger and older facility footprint relative to the number of students served. This creates operational and maintenance costs that do not decrease proportionally when enrollment fluctuates.
Taken together, staffing intensity, competitive educator compensation, and the District’s facility configuration combine to produce a higher per-pupil expenditure compared to many peer districts, reflecting the resources required to sustain the District’s educational programs, staffing model, and school infrastructure.
FY2027 FACILITIES PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
The Dedham School Department operates seven school facilities that provide dedicated space for the teaching and learning needs of approximately 535 employees and 2,670 children in grades PK-12. These school facilities account for over 725,000 sq ft of space, with an average age of 62.5 years. The operation and maintenance of the District’s facilities requires careful and thorough monitoring of structures, mechanical systems, and grounds. These responsibilities are managed by the Director of Facilities and carried out by 27 full time maintenance and custodial employees.
The proposed FY27 Facilities Operating Budget includes a $222,659 or 3.93% increase over FY26. This increase is driven primarily by (1) utility costs, (2) wages & salaries, and (3) the rising costs of supplies and materials necessary for cleaning and maintaining the facilities and grounds.
UTILITIES
The cost escalation of gas and electric still hovers in the 3%-5% range year over year. Costs associated with utilities are established via contracts with providers and, as a result, are relatively predictable. While these costs are governed by contract, the school department is working to further control utilities by installing solar infrastructure at the ECEC, DMS, and DHS.
CUSTODIAL AND BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES
Consumables such as paper products and cleaning supplies are averaging 6% - 10% increases year over year. To control and reduce spending, the school department is evaluating the costs, quality, and sustainability of all custodial supplies. Many products are being replaced to use more efficient, lower-cost, and environmentally friendly products.
CONTRACTED SERVICES
Massachusetts has established prevailing wages and the District is required to compensate vendors for contracted services under the prevailing wage law. These wages apply to all maintenance and service contracts not governed or fulfilled by collective bargaining agreements.
|
Schools (#) |
Schools Average Age |
Square Feet Total |
Square Feet per Student |
Difference from Mean (197 sq ft) per Student |
|
|
Dedham |
7 |
63 |
711,187 |
274.77 |
77.77 |
|
Milton |
6 |
69 |
678,500 |
154.7 |
-42.3 |
|
Canton |
6 |
57 |
619,097 |
190.89 |
-6.11 |
|
Northampton |
6 |
76 |
616,014 |
230.69 |
33.69 |
|
Needham |
8 |
67 |
610,806 |
109.83 |
-87.17 |
|
Norwood |
8 |
77 |
562,400 |
160.03 |
-36.97 |
|
Foxborough |
5 |
66 |
554,000 |
222.82 |
25.82 |
|
Stoneham |
6 |
37 |
551,742 |
245.29 |
48.29 |
|
Bellingham |
7 |
47 |
529,539 |
265.95 |
68.95 |
|
Westwood |
7 |
74 |
474,500 |
163.28 |
-33.72 |
|
Norton |
5 |
53 |
466,884 |
195.92 |
-1.08 |
|
Medfield |
5 |
69 |
456,212 |
180.14 |
-16.86 |
|
Amesbury |
4 |
56 |
428,000 |
160.28 |
-36.72 |
|
Ayer-Shirley |
4 |
60 |
330,836 |
205.35 |
8.35 |
CAPITAL BUDGET OVERVIEW
CAPITAL BUDGET OVERVIEW
The School Department’s annual Capital Budget aims to ensure that the community has access to and enjoys school facilities that are clean, safe, and welcoming environments for learning, gathering, and recreation. The capital budget targets projects that preserve and extend the useful life of existing facilities. Each year the School Department develops a capital budget request that prioritizes capital investment needs which are then vetted by the School Committee, the Town Manager’s office, the Finance and Warrant Committee, and the Capital Expenditures Committee. The final recommended School Department capital budget is approved by the annual Town Meeting in May.
FACILITIES OVERVIEW
The School Department maintains and operates seven buildings that equate to roughly 725,000 square feet of occupied space. The average age of our school facilities is 61.5 years. The District’s buildings are occupied and used by approximately 3,200 students and faculty members 10 months of the year. DHS, DMS, and Avery are occupied for 12 months to accommodate summer programming for Dedham’s youth.
|
Location |
Year |
Age |
Size (Sq. Ft.) |
Enrollment (#) |
Staff (#) |
|||||
|
Oakdale |
1902 |
124 |
48,909.00 |
243 |
41 |
|||||
|
Riverdale |
1920 |
106 |
37,299.00 |
194 |
36 |
|||||
|
Greenlodge |
1950 |
76 |
51,048.00 |
297 |
55 |
|||||
|
DHS |
1950 |
76 |
307,323.00 |
675 |
111.4 |
|||||
|
DMS |
2008 |
18 |
169,681.00 |
561 |
97.5 |
|||||
|
Avery |
2011 |
15 |
61,044.00 |
312 |
58 |
|||||
|
ECEC |
2017 |
9 |
51,000.00 |
279 |
69 |
CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Between 2020 and 2026 the District, with the support of the Town, has invested approximately $9.8 million in capital repairs, rehabilitation, and facility enhancement. These investments improved all School Department properties and focused on critical mechanical and structural needs, school safety, and enhancing the communities experience in their use of the District’s facilities. A detailed list of Capital projects summarized here can be found in Appendix A.
|
Investment by Type |
|
|
Type |
Cost |
|
Mechanical - Critical Need |
$1, 005,000.00 |
|
School Safety |
$ 1,665,000.00 |
|
Structural - Critical Need |
$ 5,088,000.00 |
|
User Experience |
$ 2,075,000.00 |
|
Grand Total |
$ 9,833,000.00 |
|
Investment by Location |
|
|
Location |
Cost |
|
Avery |
$ 110,000.00 |
|
DHS |
$ 4,729,000.00 |
|
DMS |
$ 1,080,000.00 |
|
Greenlodge |
$ 492,000.00 |
|
Oakdale |
$ 472,000.00 |
|
Riverdale |
$ 485,000.00 |
|
Systemwide |
$ 2,465,000.00 |
|
Grand Total |
$ 9,833,000.00 |
CAPITAL BUDGET PROPOSAL FY27
The proposed FY27 capital budget represents a strategic investment of approximately $5.8 million across all seven of the School Department’s active facilities. If approved, these projects will ensure that the District is able to continue much needed repairs, rehabilitation, and enhancements to support access to invaluable spaces for teaching, learning, and recreation for all students, faculty, and community members.
|
Project Description |
Cost |
|
Facility Access and Usability - District - ADA Compliance Upgrades |
$ 100,000.00 |
|
Athletic/Play/Recreation Maintenance and Repair - Avery - Playground - Replace Poured in Place Surface |
$ 250,000.00 |
|
Communications Infrastructure - District - Phone System Update |
$ 400,000.00 |
|
Controlled Entry - Oakdale - Reconfigure main entrance controlled access - Phase II Construction |
$ 250,000.00 |
|
Controlled Entry/Access and Front Office Reconfiguration - Greenlodge - Phase III - Construction |
$ 1,800,000.00 |
|
Electrical Infrastructure Modernization - Systemwide - Riverdale, Oakdale, Greenlodge, DHS - Phase II & III- Design & Construction |
$ 750,000.00 |
|
Emergency Egress/Fire Alarm Control Panel - DHS - Phase IIIA- Installation - Year 1 |
$ 300,000.00 |
|
Interior security camera systems - Avery - Phase III - System expansion |
$ 60,000.00 |
|
Interior security camera systems - Oakdale - Phase III - System expansion |
$ 40,000.00 |
|
Interior security camera systems - Riverdale - Phase III - System expansion |
$ 30,000.00 |
|
Interior security camera systems - Greenlodge - Phase III - System expansion |
$ 40,000.00 |
|
Exterior Rehabilitation - Oakdale - Addition Walls/Windows - Phase III - Construction |
$ 900,000.00 |
|
Exterior Rehabilitation - Riverdale - Addition Walls/Windows - Phase III - Construction |
$ 900,000.00 |
|
Total |
$5,820,000.00 |
FY27 Capital Budget Overview
A capital budget is a long-term financial plan used to pay for major projects and purchases that will benefit the community for many years. These are typically large, one-time investments rather than everyday operating expenses.
Capital budgets are used for projects such as constructing or renovating buildings, improving infrastructure, purchasing major equipment, or making technology upgrades. Because these projects are costly and have long-lasting value, they are often funded over several years, sometimes through bonds or other long-term financing.
In short, while the operating budget covers day-to-day expenses like salaries and utilities, the capital budget focuses on building, maintaining, and improving the community’s long-term assets.
- Industry Standards for Capital Investment
- DPS Capital Budget History
- School Department FY2027 Proposed Capital Budget
Industry Standards for Capital Investment
Across the public-sector facilities field, it is widely recognized that school districts must reinvest approximately 2–3 percent of the replacement value of their facilities each year to keep buildings in good working condition and prevent the accumulation of deferred maintenance.
This benchmark reflects the reality that major building systems—such as roofs, electrical systems, fire alarms, and building envelopes—have finite lifespans and must be repaired or replaced on a predictable cycle.
This guidance is particularly relevant for Dedham, where the school portfolio includes seven buildings ranging in age from 8 to more than 120 years old, with several facilities well into the second half of their expected service life. Older buildings require higher and more consistent capital reinvestment as multiple major systems reach the end of their useful life at the same time.
|
Location |
Year |
Age |
Size (Sq. Ft.) |
Estimated Replacement Cost ($600/sq. ft.) |
Annual Reinvestment Need (%) |
Annual Reinvestment Need ($) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Oakdale |
1902 |
124 |
48,909.00 |
$ 29,345,400.00 |
3.00% |
$ 880,362.00 |
|
Riverdale |
1900 |
126 |
37,299.00 |
$ 22,379,400.00 |
3.00% |
$ 671,382.00 |
|
Greenlodge |
1950 |
76 |
51,048.00 |
$ 30,628,800.00 |
3.00% |
$ 918,864.00 |
|
DHS |
1950 |
76 |
307,323.00 |
$ 184,393,800.00 |
3.00% |
$ 5,531,814.00 |
|
DMS |
2008 |
18 |
169,681.00 |
$ 101,808,600.00 |
1.50% |
$ 1,527,129.00 |
|
Avery |
2011 |
15 |
61,044.00 |
$ 36,626,400.00 |
1.00% |
$ 366,264.00 |
|
ECEC |
2017 |
9 |
51,000.00 |
$ 30,600,000.00 |
1.00% |
$ 306,000.00 |
|
63.4 |
726,304.00 |
$ 435,782,400.00 |
2.21% |
$ 9,649,467.43 |
DPS Capital Budget History
School Department FY2027 Proposed Capital Budget
Capital Budget Summary Table:
Click the Project Name link to view detailed project descriptions.

