← Home

Deep dive

Inside school staffing

Marblehead employs about 430 school staff for 2,400 students: 5.6 students per staff member, compared to 7.8 in Melrose.

The enrollment vs. staffing chart shows how three staffing measures tell different stories as enrollment declined.

Explore school spending by department: schools budget in the budget tool.

What the positions are

The town's ACFR reports 537 "education FTE" in FY24, but that number uses a broader definition of "education staff" than DESE and is affected by a FY23 counting methodology change. The state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) reports 430.2 total school staff FTE for the 2025–26 school year, broken into role categories:

Marblehead school staff by DESE role category, 2025–26 school year. "Paras + tutors" combines 14.1 paraprofessional FTE and 73.5 tutor FTE; see data note below on this classification. "Teachers (support)" includes specialists like reading, math, and English language learning teachers. Some categories overlap with special education mandates.

How role categories have changed over time

The snapshot above is a single year. Toggle between roles below to see how each category has changed in Marblehead since SY2008, alongside Melrose, Swampscott, and Stoneham.

Which positions are legally mandated?

Roughly 60-65% of positions are driven by federal or state mandates. Here's the breakdown.

Not all school staff are the same kind of expense. Some positions are required by federal or state law regardless of enrollment; others are at the district's discretion. Non-teaching staff growth breaks down by legal status as estimated below. (Note: the "~58 positions added" figure was derived from the ACFR's education FTE count, which is affected by the FY23 data discontinuity. DESE data shows total educator FTE declining over the same period. The mandate categories are still informative for understanding which types of positions are legally required, even if the specific growth numbers are uncertain.)

Category	Status	Est. FTE growth	Key law
SPED paraprofessionals	Required	15–20	IDEA; IEPs; 603 CMR 28.06
SPED teachers/specialists	Required	10–15	IDEA; 603 CMR 28.00
Counselors/psychologists	Partial	5–8	IDEA evals mandated; ratios not
ELL/ESL teachers	Required	2–4	MGL 71A; LOOK Act; Title III
SPED administration	Required	1–3	603 CMR 28.03
School nurses	Required	1–2	MGL 71 s.53
Compliance (Title IX, 504)	Required	0.5–1	Title IX; Section 504
Technology staff	Discretionary	2–4	None
Curriculum/instructional coaches	Discretionary	2–4	None
Other administrators	Discretionary	3–5	Principal required; rest not
Total estimated		~42–66

Estimated contribution of each staff category to the ~58 non-teaching positions added between FY2015 and FY2024. Categories classified by federal and Massachusetts law. "Required" means a specific statute or regulation mandates the position or staffing ratio. "Partial" means some functions are mandated (e.g., IDEA evaluations) but staffing levels are at district discretion. "Discretionary" means no law requires the position.

The largest driver is special education. Marblehead's high-needs student population grew from 27% to 32% of enrollment between FY2015 and FY2024. Students with autism increased 34%, and students with neurological or health disabilities increased 48%. Each IEP specifying a 1:1 aide generates a full FTE that the district must provide under IDEA and Massachusetts 603 CMR 28.

Mandated does not mean beyond scrutiny. IEPs are developed with district participation. The mandate is to deliver the services in the IEP, but the service delivery model (inclusion vs. substantially separate, in-district vs. out-of-district) is a district decision that affects both staffing levels and cost. Massachusetts is a "maximum feasible benefit" state, meaning IEPs here tend to require more services than in states that follow only the federal floor.

How Marblehead compares to peers

How Marblehead's staffing ratios compare to Melrose, Stoneham, and Swampscott by role.

The existing enrollment vs. staffing chart compares student-to-teacher ratios across four towns. DESE's staffing database (EPIMS, the Education Personnel Information Management System) allows a broader comparison: all staff, broken out by role.

Why peer towns, not the state average. Comparing Marblehead to the Massachusetts statewide average on spending, staffing ratios, or test scores pools very different districts together: urban systems with 60–80% high-needs populations sit in the same denominator as small wealthy suburbs. Against that pooled average, Marblehead can look lean on per-pupil spending and average on staffing ratios, because the denominator includes districts operating under very different pressures. The charts on this page use four North Shore peer towns (Swampscott, Melrose, Stoneham, and Marblehead). Where relevant, other pages on the site use a wider peer group including Hingham, Winchester, Wellesley, and Natick. That is a choice, and it changes the conclusion in both directions: Marblehead looks more staff-intensive against peers than against the state, and roughly mid-pack rather than below-average on per-pupil spending.

Overall staffing ratios

District	Enrollment	Total FTE	Students per FTE
Marblehead	2,389	430.2	5.6
Stoneham	2,296	395.9	5.8
Swampscott	2,083	316.6	6.6
Melrose	3,730	480.3	7.8

Students per total school FTE, 2025–26 school year. Lower numbers indicate more staff per student. Marblehead has the most staff-intensive ratio of the four districts.

Staffing by role, four towns

Staff FTE per 100 students by role category, 2025–26 school year. Normalizing by enrollment allows comparison across districts of different sizes. Marblehead's paras + tutors are combined (see data note above). Stoneham's special education related staff is an outlier (2.12 per 100 students vs. 0.48–0.81 for other towns). Melrose's low medical FTE (0.03) may reflect different reporting rather than fewer nurses.

Where Marblehead stands out

Compared to the average of three peers, Marblehead runs higher in several non-teaching categories:

Counselors per 100 students

0.50peer avg: 0.26

Instr. coaches per 100 students

0.23peer avg: 0.05

Office/clerical per 100 students

1.14peer avg: 0.73

Admin per 100 students

1.09peer avg: 0.87

These are not all discretionary gaps. Some counselor and medical positions are driven by special education caseloads. And some peer districts may be understaffed rather than Marblehead being overstaffed. The comparison shows where Marblehead is an outlier, not where it is necessarily wrong.

The FY23 data jump

The ACFR's "Education" line jumped from 482.69 to 537.00 between FY22 and FY23, the main reason the ACFR staffing trend points up while DESE's points down. The Town's own payroll rosters show the school workforce went from 705 employees in FY22 to 699 in FY23, a net decline of six. The +54 was a reporting change, not hiring; the current school finance office and Town CFO, asked in 2026, characterized it the same way.

Continue reading ▸

The salary line didn't move.

General Fund education salaries went from $34.4M (FY22) to $35.3M (FY23) – 2.6% growth. Fifty-four new positions at the FY22 average teacher salary of about $80,000 would have cost roughly $4M extra, closer to 12% growth. So whatever moved the FTE line, it wasn't hiring.

The FY23 ACFR rewrote the schedule.

Reading the FY22 and FY23 reports side by side, three concrete things changed in FY23:

• Decimals became rounded numbers. Prior years: 482.69, 94.58, 20.97, 34.04. FY23: 537.00, 91.00, 19.00, 30.00. Every category, not just education.
• Public safety and Fire were merged into one row, with prior years restated.
• Other functions all dropped. Total town FTE rose +40.5, not +54.31. About 14 of the "education gain" came out of general gov, public works, human services, and culture/rec.

Where the positions likely went.

Circuit Breaker (the state special-education reimbursement that pays for SPED staff) tripled the same year: $313K (FY22) to $902K (FY23), then $1.22M (FY24), $1.39M (FY25). The FY27 budget shows the practice continuing today: explicit moves like Move 0.5 FTE Asst Stud Srvc Dir from LEA to Tuit Rev recategorize positions across funding sources. If the FY23 ACFR began counting revolving-fund and grant-funded positions, the picture lines up.

DESE shows the opposite trend.

Total DESE educator FTE went 450 to 445 the same year. Classroom teacher FTE barely moved (250.0 to 245.8). DESE's EPIMS uses a narrower role definition and doesn't capture revolving-fund or grant-funded positions the way the ACFR can. And the ACFR held at exactly 537.00 for two consecutive years (FY23, FY24), which a live headcount would rarely do. ESSER ramp-down doesn't fit either: it spent $610K in FY22, $105K in FY23, $0 from FY24, so ESSER-funded positions disappearing should have dropped the FY24 figure.

What the current administration says.

Asked about the discrepancy in 2026, the current Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Operations and the Town's Chief Financial Officer reviewed the schedule and characterized the FY22 to FY23 jump as a reporting error by the previous administrations rather than 54 actual hires. Neither was employed in FY22, so this is their best inference from the data and the prior reports, not first-hand testimony to the original counting decisions. The town has not formally amended the FY23 or FY24 ACFRs, and the schedule itself still carries no methodology footnote: the ACFR attributes the data to "Source: Town Records."

The current school finance office points to DESE's EPIMS data, which the district reports to the state multiple times per year, as the more reliable staffing source.

The payroll roster shows schools shrank that year, not grew.

The Town's payroll system records every paid employee in every fiscal year. A public records request returned the rosters for FY08 through FY26. Counting the school-side departments (the five schools, district administration, school custodians/transport, the school revolving fund, and school grants), the school workforce went from 705 employees in FY22 to 699 in FY23 – a net decline of six.

The roster counts every paid worker regardless of hours, including substitutes and seasonal staff – a broader population than FTE. So the +54.31 in the ACFR can't be explained by hiring that the payroll system somehow missed: the people on payroll in FY23 numbered fewer than in FY22. The records request didn't return a methodology footnote, but it did establish a clean upper bound on the change – bookkeeping, not workforce.

DESE data shows staffing declining on multiple measures. Total DESE educator FTE fell from 501.8 (FY15) to 431.8 (FY24), a 13.9% decline. Classroom teacher FTE fell from 263.9 (FY17 peak) to 224.8 (2025–26), a 14.8% decline. The district has also cut approximately 50 positions over FY25–FY27 through layoffs, unfilled vacancies, and stipend reductions.

How are positions actually funded?

The schools collect money from several places besides property taxes: rent on the school buildings, tuition from international students hosted at MHS, tuition from out-of-district students placed in Marblehead programs, PreK/Kindergarten tuition, and federal grants. Each one flows into a separate account.

In a normal year those accounts pay for related expenses (the international-student program's own costs, building maintenance, PreK staffing, grant-funded programming). The FY27 budget redirects $266,595 of that money to cover five specific salaries that property taxes used to cover. The same employees keep their jobs. Whatever those accounts were doing before has $266,595 less to work with; the FY27 budget packet does not say what:

Position	Source of money	Cost moved off property taxes
2.0 FTE	Tuition from international students hosted at MHS	$147,586
0.5 FTE Assistant Student Services Director	Tuition Marblehead receives from out-of-district students	$57,680
0.5 FTE Facilities Assistant	Rent collected on school buildings	$38,257
0.1 FTE Assistant Business Manager	PreK/Kindergarten tuition	$11,536
0.1 FTE Assistant Business Manager	Federal grants	$11,536
Total cost shifted off property taxes		$266,595

Over years, this kind of move is the likely mechanism behind the FY23 ACFR jump: positions stayed employed but moved between accounts. The 482.69 to 537.00 leap looks consistent with a one-time consolidation that brought all the previously-moved positions into a single visible count.

What are the options?

The decomposition above suggests the discretionary slice of staffing growth is roughly 7–13 positions. That limits how much can be cut without hitting mandate-driven roles. But other levers exist.

Shared services through collaboratives

Massachusetts allows school districts to form educational collaboratives: organizations where multiple districts pool resources to run shared programs (most commonly for special education) that would be too expensive or too small for any single district to operate alone. Marblehead is a member of the Northshore Education Consortium (NEC), one of 24 state-recognized collaboratives. NEC was founded in 1975 and has 21 member districts including Swampscott. It operates six schools and two transition programs, primarily for students with disabilities.

However, NEC raised tuitions an average of 9.4% for FY2027, with the highest-tier programs climbing 12%. This unanticipated cost increase forced the district to cut deeper than planned, pushing total FY2027 position reductions from 14.75 to 18.25 FTEs.

Reducing out-of-district special education placements

When a district cannot meet a student's IEP needs in its own schools, it must pay to send the student to a private school or collaborative program elsewhere. These are called out-of-district placements. Marblehead spends roughly $4.6 million per year on them. Massachusetts sends 6.1% of students with disabilities out-of-district, nearly triple the 2.3% national rate. Private placements can cost $75,000–$150,000+ per student including transportation. Bringing even 2–3 students back from private placements into collaborative or in-district programs could save $150,000–$450,000 annually, but only if appropriate programs exist to meet each student's IEP needs.

Shared transportation

A February 2026 Inspector General report found that special education transportation costs average $13,825 per student statewide, compared to $1,045 for general education. The report identified educational collaboratives as the "most logical structures" for regional transportation. Pilot programs through the LABBB Collaborative (serving Arlington, Bedford, Burlington, Lexington, and others) and the Southeast Transportation Network saved $54,000–$92,000, but the Inspector General noted these were "never scaled."

Cooperative purchasing and shared back-office

Some collaboratives run purchasing cooperatives for food service, supplies, and fuel. UMass has launched a shared services initiative for HR, payroll, and procurement projected to save $16 million in its first phase. No comparable K-12 model exists in Massachusetts yet, though the state's Efficiency and Regionalization grant program has funded planning studies, including a $100,000 Regional IT grant involving seven North Shore communities (not including Marblehead).

What these options share

None of these approaches produce savings fast enough to close a structural budget gap in the current fiscal year. They are cost-growth reducers over a 3–5 year horizon, not substitutes for override revenue or immediate budget cuts. Their value is in bending the cost curve so the same pressure does not build up again.