APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2001-06 > 0993745008


From: "Timothy C. Coyne" <>
Subject: [APG] SS-5 cost increase
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:16:48 -0400


I liked Fred Saunders accounting of SSA's real cost of processing
SS-5s - until he started adding in excessive infrastructure costs. Let
me suggest an analogy.
I don't know if it's the case around the country because I've only
seen it in the archdiocese of Philadelphia, but every parish school here
has a large sign out front telling how much this parochial school saves
public tax dollars. There is a truth, be it only a half truth. The
billboard total dollar figure is calculated by taking the total budget
of the local school district and dividing by the total number of
students in the public school district to arrive at a per pupil cost
figure. The parish school then takes this figure and multiplies it by
the number of children being serviced by that school. For instance, if
the public school per capita expenditure is $8,000 (not unusual in the
Philadelphia suburbs) and the local parochial school enrolls 500
students, then the parochial billboard proclaims that the school is
saving local taxpayers $4,000,000! It doesn't. And the parochial
school isn't spending anywhere near $4,000,000 on those 500 children
either.
The reality is that most public schools could absorb those 500
children for far less than $8,000 a child. The public school can
increase class size to take up some of the slack. There may be
underutilized classrooms and other facilities. A public school district
of 5,000 students is unlikely to have to build more classrooms or other
infrastructure. It is unlikely more administrators will be hired. More
teachers may have to be hired but staff will not need to be increased by
10%. Infrastructure does not bloat.
Applying this to SSA, if SS-5s increase work load by 10%, this will
not increase the SSA budget by an equal amount. Their infrastructure
already exists before SS-5 applications come in. Will the number of
buildings have to increase by 10%? No, enough space likely already
exists. Another desk can usually be added to a 10 desk office. Will
janitors need to increase by 10%? The amount of floor space to sweep
hasn't changed. Instead of new staff being added, paying overtime will
add very little to the overhead of maintaining an employee, e.g. health
insurance costs aren't different if an employee works 8 hours or 9 hours
with overtime. Fred's accounting doesn't reckon on the overtime
solution. Private industry does this widely to avoid costly new employee
hiring.
The bottom line is that I don't think one can legitimately justify
ramping the cost of the SS-5 by applying a pro rata share of
infrastructure costs to the fee. I'm not arguing that the SS-5 fee
shouldn't increase. But a quadrupling of the fee...?
Tim Coyne

--
RIGLER, HORNKETH and ESLING
families, anytime, anywhere
Timothy C. Coyne
specializing in genealogical research in
Philadelphia and southeastern Pennsylvania


This thread: