Mark Cherpak, director of operational services for the Steel Valley School District, had hoped to use federal stimulus money designated for school districts in Pennsylvania to help balance his district's 2009-2010 budget.

But when Gov. Ed Rendell and the state Legislature used the money to balance the state budget, some of Mr. Cherpak's plans fell apart.

The loss of a potential pot of $317 million statewide -- which the governor had proposed school districts spend on a wide range of uses -- affects most school districts.

That money no longer is available because the governor and Legislature used the $1.56 billion in the state fiscal stabilization fund -- part of the federal stimulus package -- for other education spending.

Among local school districts, those proposed grants ranged from $54,500 in Hampton to $13.1 million that had been slated for Pittsburgh Public Schools.

In Steel Valley, $412,000 in a proposed fiscal stabilization grant had been placed in the district's budget to be used for carpeting, computers and textbooks this school year.

For some districts, the news was devastating, and, in some cases, surprising, as no official announcement was made that the grants had fallen by the wayside.

But in other districts, business managers had resisted putting the proposed funds into their budgets, either because they were wary of the state budget impasse or tipped off by their legislators that the funds were in danger of disappearing.

The $1.56 billion in fiscal stabilization money is in part filling a $354.7-million gap caused by the state reducing its share of basic education funding and providing a $300-million increase in basic education funding over last year.

That resulted in districts getting an average increase in basic education subsidy of 5.7 percent. Based on a state formula aimed at improved adequacy and equity, the increase ranged from 2 percent to 22.3 percent, depending on the district.

The current plan also uses a similar amount of fiscal stabilization money for basic education in 2009-10.

The fiscal stabilization money also was used to restore some higher education cuts.

The $1.56 billion was only part of Pennsylvania's federal stimulus package for education, but it was the piece state officials had the most control over.

Districts statewide still will receive other stimulus money earmarked by the federal government for specific purposes, including $384 million for special education and $383 million Title I, which is aimed at improving math and reading achievement in low-income schools.

Special education and Title I money are allotted using specific formulas and for limited uses and could not be taken over by the state to balance its budget. However, while state funding to districts for special education usually increases each year, it did not do so this year.

By using the fiscal stabilization money to cover some of the state's education budget obligations, the governor and Legislature essentially did away with the proposal to provide certain grants to districts across the state over the next two years in addition to basic education subsidy increases.

The governor's earlier plans called for making grants for a broad range of uses, including class size reduction, avoidance of layoffs, capital improvements and general efforts to improve education.

Steel Valley was not the only district counting on the grant money.

In the West Mifflin Area School District, Business Manager Dennis Cmar said there is now a $430,900 hole in the budget -- the size of the fiscal stabilization grant the district expected to get.

"This is sobering news," Mr. Cmar said. "This is money that school districts had expected."

Mr. Cmar said he had planned to use the funds to "offset revenue losses and tax losses due to economic conditions."

In the Pittsburgh Public Schools, plans called for using the $13.1 million for the Middle Grades Summer Camp for literacy skills the district is implementing this year for all middle school students in an effort to get students ready for ninth-grade work.

But because district officials had been warned by some legislators that some fiscal stabilization funding was tenuous, they created various versions of plans for the camp, including some that didn't use the money.

Pittsburgh Superintendent Mark Roosevelt said the district hoped to use the fiscal stabilization funds to provide "some of the fun activities that we think should be part of a summer camp."

Those activities would have included such items as judo camps, fencing clubs and drama societies.

Mr. Roosevelt said his staff will check with federal officials to see if some of the other stimulus money targeted for Title I programs may be used for the camp activities, but even then he expects they will be scaled back.

He said he also will attempt to seek other funding sources.

There is much disappointment in the Duquesne City School District, where the anticipated $528,000 fiscal stabilization grant was to have paid for major repairs to the leaking roof at the Duquesne Education Center as well as a new phone system and update to the energy management system.

Duquesne also was hoping to use some funds to purchase a new bell system, computers and cafeteria furniture as well as to replace doors and locks.

"All of those things are gone now," said Sarah McCluan, spokeswoman for the Allegheny Intermediate Unit, which operates the Duquesne district. "This wasn't a pie-in-the-sky list. This is a real, practical list that is now just erased. It's just gone."

In Duquesne, there won't be any holes in the budget because the projects won't be undertaken since the money isn't coming, Mrs. McCluan said. "This is a hard hit for our district," she said.

Likewise, in the Shaler Area School District, officials did not include the projected $401,200 fiscal stabilization grant originally slated for the district in the budget because Business Manager Charles Bennett feared the funds might not become available as promised.

That fear was based on the fact that the state set up online application processes for the Title I, and special education stimulus funds, but not for the fiscal stabilization funds. "They never opened a window for the fiscal stabilization grants, and that's when we knew that something was up," Mr. Bennett said.

Yet, Shaler officials, as those in other districts, had held out hope the money would come through and, if so, wanted to use it to help offset the $297,000 cost of a window replacement project at two primary schools and to purchase some computer equipment upgrades.

Similarly in the Wilkinsburg School District, which earlier was set to receive $830,900 in fiscal stabilization funds, Business Manager Bruce Dakin, didn't count on the funds to balance the budget.

He did, however, have discussions with administrators on how the district would use the money should it materialize. "We looked at long-term improvements for buildings, things like boilers, generators, roofs, things we could do without floating a bond issue," he said.

In the McKeesport Area School District, Business Manager David Seropian did not include the $1.5 million in fiscal stabilization funds that had been slated for his district in the budget because he thought the funding was uncertain.

But if it came through, district officials had planned to use it to offset part of the cost of the $42.7-million elementary renovation and construction project it is undertaking.

"It's definitely a disappointment because it would have been nice to have to put towards our renovation. It would have helped to reduce the fiscal impact to our taxpayers," Mr. Seropian said.

Some other districts, including Keystone Oaks, Penn Hills, Woodland Hills, Sto-Rox and Seneca Valley, officials either never believed the grant money would materialize or were warned by legislators not to expect and made no definite plans for it.

"I knew the state was having trouble with the budget and I knew the other (stimulus) money, for Title I and special education, they couldn't touch. But uses for the fiscal stabilization money were very open ended, so I didn't bank on getting that," said Richard Liberto, director of business affairs for the Penn Hills School District.

Charles Lanna, director of administrative services for Sto-Rox, said he was so wary of the budget situation, he didn't even include an increase in basic education subsidy for his district, though it ended up receiving a 2 percent increase of $157.032.

Mr. Roosevelt said while it's been difficult for districts to find out they are losing the fiscal stabilization grants they hoped for, he believes there's a larger concern with state officials using federal stimulus money to balance the state education budget.

That concern is what will happen in two years when the stimulus funds are gone.

"As the federal stimulus money goes away in two years, I imagine a gigantic funding cliff unless the state revisits its funding issues," Mr. Roosevelt said. "Either they will use state dollars to fill that gap two years hence or they will have a huge problem."

Looking for more from the Post-Gazette? Join PG+, our members-only web site. You'll get exclusive sports content, opinion, financial information, discounts from retailers and restaurants, and more. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.