A five-year history of students in these developments is included below. The District continues to closely monitor and annually evaluate the impact of these types of developments on its residential enrollment. 13 Non-Resident Enrollment Board Grant – The District allows the children of employees to enroll as students in the District. This enrollment is projected to increase next school year to 188 students, which is a 6.8 percent increase when compared to the September 2020 count day total of 176. Statutory Transfer Tuition Students – Pursuant to Missouri Revised Statutes Section 167.131, the District has enrolled students from unaccredited school districts in the same or adjoining county since the 2013-2014 school year. The Normandy School Collaborative gained provisional accreditation and the Board agreed to phase out students per an approved memorandum of understanding’s (MOU) student transition plan. Statutory tuition enrollment is projected to remain flat since there were no statutory tuition students in the senior class. Address (Name of Development) Year Built Units Condo/Rental Advertised Avg. Monthly Rent 2 BD Number of Unique Units 2020- 2021 2019- 2020 2018- 2019 2017- 2018 2016- 2017 25 North Central (Ceylon) 2018 121 Rental $3,500 0 5 5 2 0 0 8500 Maryland (The Barton) 2018 229 Rental $2,500 14 6 8 5 0 0 212 South Meramec (Two Twelve Clayton) 2017 250 Rental $3,000 10 7 7 2 1 0 155 Carondelet Plaza (The Crescent) 2007 73 Condo $6,250 2 0 0 2 1 0 8025 Maryland (Maryland Walk) 2006 103 Condo $3,500 3 1 2 1 0 2 2 The Boulevard (Allegro - Richmond Heights) 2005 74 Rental $2,000 0 2 5 5 4 2 150 Carondelet Plaza (The Plaza in Clayton) 2003 81 Condo NA 0 1 1 0 1 1 8025 Bonhomme (Clayton on the Park) 2000 208 Rental $3,700 11 9 10 7 12 14 800 S Hanley (The Residence) 1997 39 Condo NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 S Hanley (Claytonian) 1991 68 Condo $1,995 0 2 0 0 0 0 250 S Brentwood (Shaw Park Place) 1986 29 Condo $1,892 4 5 6 7 7 6 816 S Hanley (816 Club) 1974 56 Condo $2,225 0 0 1 3 2 4 200 S Brentwood (Park Tower) 1966 104 Condo $3,000 2 2 3 2 2 2 710 S Hanley (Whitehall) 1966 64 Condo $4,500 2 3 4 3 3 4 900 S Hanley (Hanley Towers) 1964 71 Condo $1,995 5 8 4 7 7 10 230 S Brentwood (Bethesda Barclay) 1962 84 Rental NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1654 53 51 56 46 40 45 Grade 2020- 2021 2019- 2020 2018- 2019 2017- 2018 2016- 2017 Notes: K 1 3 1 4 2 •The following percentages of students are still residing in these buildings after: 1 2 3 4 2 3 Two years - 25% 2 2 4 2 2 2 Three years - 12% 3 3 2 3 4 8 Four years - 15% 4 3 2 3 8 1 Five+ years - 14% 5 2 7 6 1 4 6 10 6 0 3 5 •The District is averaging 4 students per 100 high rise units. 7 5 1 4 3 2 8 1 5 5 1 2 9 5 5 4 1 4 10 4 5 3 4 4 11 7 4 7 4 4 12 6 9 4 3 4 51 56 46 40 45 Enrolled Students Enrolled Students 14

Address (Name of Development) Year Built Units Condo/Rental Advertised Avg. Monthly Rent 2 BD Number of Unique Units 2020- 2021 2019- 2020 2018- 2019 2017- 2018 2016- 2017 25 North Central (Ceylon) 2018 121 Rental $3,500 0 5 5 2 0 0 8500 Maryland (The Barton) 2018 229 Rental $2,500 14 6 8 5 0 0 212 South Meramec (Two Twelve Clayton) 2017 250 Rental $3,000 10 7 7 2 1 0 155 Carondelet Plaza (The Crescent) 2007 73 Condo $6,250 2 0 0 2 1 0 8025 Maryland (Maryland Walk) 2006 103 Condo $3,500 3 1 2 1 0 2 2 The Boulevard (Allegro - Richmond Heights) 2005 74 Rental $2,000 0 2 5 5 4 2 150 Carondelet Plaza (The Plaza in Clayton) 2003 81 Condo NA 0 1 1 0 1 1 8025 Bonhomme (Clayton on the Park) 2000 208 Rental $3,700 11 9 10 7 12 14 800 S Hanley (The Residence) 1997 39 Condo NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 S Hanley (Claytonian) 1991 68 Condo $1,995 0 2 0 0 0 0 250 S Brentwood (Shaw Park Place) 1986 29 Condo $1,892 4 5 6 7 7 6 816 S Hanley (816 Club) 1974 56 Condo $2,225 0 0 1 3 2 4 200 S Brentwood (Park Tower) 1966 104 Condo $3,000 2 2 3 2 2 2 710 S Hanley (Whitehall) 1966 64 Condo $4,500 2 3 4 3 3 4 900 S Hanley (Hanley Towers) 1964 71 Condo $1,995 5 8 4 7 7 10 230 S Brentwood (Bethesda Barclay) 1962 84 Rental NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1654 53 51 56 46 40 45 Grade 2020- 2021 2019- 2020 2018- 2019 2017- 2018 2016- 2017 Notes: K 1 3 1 4 2 •The following percentages of students are still residing in these buildings after: 1 2 3 4 2 3 Two years - 25% 2 2 4 2 2 2 Three years - 12% 3 3 2 3 4 8 Four years - 15% 4 3 2 3 8 1 Five+ years - 14% 5 2 7 6 1 4 6 10 6 0 3 5 •The District is averaging 4 students per 100 high rise units. 7 5 1 4 3 2 8 1 5 5 1 2 9 5 5 4 1 4 10 4 5 3 4 4 11 7 4 7 4 4 12 6 9 4 3 4 51 56 46 40 45 Enrolled Students Enrolled Students 14 Voluntary Transfer Student Program (VTS) – The Voluntary Transfer Student Program (VTS) is a program administered by the Voluntary Interdistrict Choice Corporation, a non-profit entity formed to collect and administer state funds to support the voluntary transfer students who choose to attend a district other than the student’s district of residence (the City of St. Louis School District). The voluntary transfer enrollment is projected to fall to 168 students, which is an 11.1 percent decrease when compared to the September 2020 count day enrollment of 189 students. Personal Tuition and Tax-Credit Tuition Students – According to RSMo 167.151 the School Board, in its discretion, may admit to the school pupils not entitled to free instruction and prescribe the tuition fee to be paid by them. Personal tuition and tax credit enrollment are projected to increase five students or 23.81 percent. 15

Personal Tuition and Tax-Credit Tuition Students – According to RSMo 167.151 the School Board, in its discretion, may admit to the school pupils not entitled to free instruction and prescribe the tuition fee to be paid by them. Personal tuition and tax credit enrollment are projected to increase five students or 23.81 percent. 15 The health insurance plan year is a calendar year, not fiscal, and is negotiated in the summer months each year. BUDGETS AND BUDGETARY ACCOUNTING Budget Management The District follows these procedures in establishing the budgetary data reflected in the financial statements:  In accordance with RSMo Chapter 67 and Board Policy DB, the District adopts a budget for each fund.  Prior to July, the Superintendent, who serves as the budget officer, submits to the Board of Education a proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning on the following July 1. The proposed budget includes estimated revenues and proposed expenditures for all District funds. Budgeted expenditures cannot exceed beginning available monies plus estimated revenues for the year.  A public hearing is conducted to obtain taxpayer comments. Prior to its approval by the Board of Education, the budget document is available for public inspection.  Prior to July 1, the budget is legally enacted by a vote of the Board of Education.  Subsequent to its formal approval of the budget, the Board of Education has the authority to make necessary adjustments to the budget by a formal vote of the Board. For each fund, total fund expenditures may not legally exceed final amended budgeted expenditures. Expenditure appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year.  Budgets are adopted on the cash basis of accounting for all governmental funds. The cash basis is used to enable the District to more accurately budget revenue and expenses as the resources are expended or received. Budget Cycle Dec/Jan - Dept/Building needs budgets prepared Jan - BOE discusses budget framework Feb - Update BOE on enrollment & staffing Early March - Dept/Building wants budgets requests due April - Budget compiled and refined May - BOE discusses draft budget document June - BOE Adopts budget Teacher Salaries are negotiated in odd- numbered years beginning in January and receive Board approval by the end of March. 16

The cash basis is used to enable the District to more accurately budget revenue and expenses as the resources are expended or received. Budget Cycle Dec/Jan - Dept/Building needs budgets prepared Jan - BOE discusses budget framework Feb - Update BOE on enrollment & staffing Early March - Dept/Building wants budgets requests due April - Budget compiled and refined May - BOE discusses draft budget document June - BOE Adopts budget Teacher Salaries are negotiated in odd- numbered years beginning in January and receive Board approval by the end of March. 16 Budget Development Process Zero-Based Budgeting – An Overview Each year, the Superintendent and the Chief Financial Officer present a proposed budget to the Board of Education that includes estimates of the total expenditures required to operate the District. Before this can happen, staff across the District must work through a number of components to develop these cost estimates. This process requires active involvement from teachers, building leaders, coordinators and all support staff in setting the stage. District administrators are committed to fostering inclusive budget discussions centered on student achievement and the goals that are leading the Superintendent’s work. The District’s instructional and departmental operating budgets were prepared through a Zero-Based Budgeting (ZBB) approach. This approach helps ensure that the budget is developed to align with priorities for instructional practices and organizational needs. The ZBB approach is built on needs and priorities rather than on historical spending trends. The ZBB process is about creating accountability for what the District spends and transparency of the decisions for where the District spends. Building the Budget to Align with Budget Priorities Since there is no wrong way to prepare a budget or a standard budget process for ZBB, each administrator built the process around the building’s/department’s culture to ensure what they do, who they do it for, why they do it and how well they do it are all maintained. By developing their own approach to this process, the building/department owns each decision provides input to each decision and is accountable for its results and how the results are defined. Each administrative leader was tasked to identify the “Needs” of the building or department by using decision units. Needs are defined as resources required to provide only the most fundamental services essential to execute the written curriculum, ensure adequate support services and operate the building. A decision unit is a decision-making group of staff that can be comprised of representatives from grade levels, subject areas, programs and departments that develop and prioritize budget requests. The Need’s recommendations are analytically reviewed by the Chief Financial Officer and significant fluctuations are discussed with the administrative leader who submitted the request. Next, each administrative leader was tasked to identify “Wants” and “Enhancements” of the building or department again by using decision units. Wants are defined as resources essential to provide educational services, which expand the written curriculum and achieve the level of excellence provided by the District. Enhancements are defined as resources that will expand educational services and opportunities for students in alignment with the Strategic Plan. Each administrative leader was asked to work with their decision unit(s) to prioritize the list of Wants and Enhancements in order from most important to least important. The decision unit level prioritized Wants and Enhancements list, which are then discussed at a March District Leadership Council meeting and prioritized at a District-wide level. Collaborating to Balance A zero-based budget starts from a "zero base" and every function within an organization is analyzed for its needs and wants – all expenses must be justified. Budgets are then built for the upcoming year based upon these District-wide prioritized requests. The final ZBB budget is then balanced given funding constraints approved by the Board. 17

Budgets are then built for the upcoming year based upon these District-wide prioritized requests. The final ZBB budget is then balanced given funding constraints approved by the Board. 17 All members of the District Leadership Council share in the experience of analyzing budget trade-offs and making tough decisions between building and department requested wants and enhancements. Stakeholder Involvement Stakeholder feedback is essential to a transparent, forward-thinking budget. There are several tools the Board and administration use to communicate with the public.  Committees – There are several committees in the District that help guide the direction of schools, curriculum and the budget.  Public Survey – On a bi-annual basis, the District will conduct an outsourced public survey through a marketing research firm to provide an unbiased view of public opinion. This gives all residents a chance to have their voices heard.  Social Media – The District maintains a Facebook page and Twitter feed to provide a two-way dialog with citizens. Several individual programs in the District also maintain an active and vibrant social media presence. Budget Monitoring Throughout the fiscal year, two-way communication is maintained between the Office of Business and Finance and the various budget administrators. Since events change throughout the year, budget administrators will periodically need to revise a budget item. What results is a “give and take” approach to the request for revisions in budget amounts. First, the administrator’s entire function is reviewed for areas that might have excess budget amounts. If it is determined that there are excess budget amounts, then a budget transfer is completed to move the excess budget amount needed to fill the request. If it is determined that the administrator’s function has no excess budget amount, then other functions are reviewed for excess budget amounts. Finally, if these reviews reveal no excess budget amounts, then a budget modification request is submitted to the Board for approval. Monthly financial reports are provided to the Board indicating actual performance compared to budget. In addition, the Director of Finance reviews actual performance compared to budget on a continuing basis. As the year progresses, this review increases in focus to the extent that over the last few months of the fiscal year the budget is reviewed on a line item by line item basis. 18