Forecast of the General Fund and its two board-policy (701.5R1) KPIs. The base case is PFM's own 7-year GF cash-flow model (the district advisor's authoritative projection); conservative/optimistic flex revenue and expenditure around it. Uncertain quantities are shown as a band.
This supersedes the earlier budget-based forecast. The printed FY2026 budget showed a ~+$6M surplus; PFM projects ~$225.1M of FY2026 spending (vs. the $212.1M budget) — a ~$6M operating deficit. That single change pulls the whole solvency path down.
Caveats. FY2024+ are unaudited. The assigned+unassigned roll is anchored on the FY2024 Certified Annual Report ($14.88M) with ~±$3M slack; read solvency within ~±1.5 pts. FY2026 max authorized budget (for UAB) is estimated.
Solvency ratio — trajectory vs. board target (10–15%, 5% floor)
| Fiscal year | Conservative | Base | Optimistic |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY2020 (audited) | — | 4.21% | — |
| FY2021 (audited) | — | 6.35% | — |
| FY2022 (audited) | — | 2.82% | — |
| FY2023 (audited) | — | 2.45% | — |
| FY2024 (CAR) | — | 7.49% | — |
| FY2025 (est.) | — | 4.09% | — |
| FY2026 (PFM proj.) | -2.15% | 0.50% | 4.20% |
| FY2027 (PFM proj.) | -4.03% | 1.18% | 8.39% |
| FY2028 (PFM proj.) | -5.28% | 2.41% | 13.00% |
| FY2029 (PFM proj.) | -6.64% | 3.52% | 17.50% |
Unspent Authorized Budget ratio — vs. board target (5–10%)
| Fiscal year | Conservative | Base | Optimistic |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY2025 (actual) | — | 2.31% | — |
| FY2026 (est.) | -2.40% | -1.39% | 1.65% |
With PFM's ~$225M spend against ~$222M of estimated authority, the FY2026 UAB is roughly zero to negative — i.e. ICCSD is spending at or beyond its legal authority, as it did in FY2023 (−1.21%). Far below the 5–10% target and still last among large Iowa peers.
How the year ends — the bottom line
- FY2026 operating result (base/PFM): −$6.0M — a deficit, not the surplus the printed budget implied.
- FY2026 assigned+unassigned fund balance: ~$1.1M (base) — a thin sliver, down from ~$14.9M at FY2024.
- FY2026 solvency ratio: base 0.50% (band -2.15–4.20%) — far below the 5% floor, let alone the 10–15% target.
- FY2026 UAB: roughly zero to negative — at/over the legal spending limit.
Read: the FY2024 fund-balance rebuild (to ~$14.9M, solvency ~7.5%) was temporary — driven by an unusually low FY2024 spend ($198M). As spending snapped back ($212M FY2025, $225M FY2026), the cushion eroded. On PFM's numbers the General Fund ends FY2026 essentially at zero unassigned balance and stays below its 5% solvency floor every year through FY2029, only crawling back toward ~3.5%. The district does not return to its target band within the forecast horizon. This is a structural operating-margin problem layered on top of the cash-timing crunch — the warrants and interfund loans manage liquidity, but they do not fix the solvency gap.