Education Research Report: U.S. Spending on Public Schools in 2019 Highest Since 2008

Education Research Report: U.S. Spending on Public Schools in 2019 Highest Since 2008

U.S. Spending on Public Schools in 2019 Highest Since 2008

K-12 School Spending Up 4.7% in 2019 From Previous Year

The nation spent $752.3 billion on its 48 million children in public schools in fiscal year 2019, a 4.7% increase from the previous year and the most per pupil in more than a decade.

Instructional salaries, the largest expenditure within current spending, totaled $239.9 billion in fiscal year 2019 or 31.9% of total expenditures for public elementary-secondary education.

The Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of School System Finances tables released todayshow per pupil current spending for elementary and secondary public education (pre-K through 12th grade) for all 50 states and the District of Columbia increased 5.0% to $13,187 in FY 2019 from $12,559 in FY 2018 — the largest increase since 2008.

Breaking Down School Spending

Total expenditures for elementary and secondary education include FY 2019 “current” spending, capital outlay expenditures, interest on debt and payments to other governments.

Current spending, which made up $652.3 billion or 86.7% of total expenditures in FY 2019, consists of expenses for day-to-day activities, including teachers’ salaries and benefits and most other school system daily expenses.

Capital outlay, another portion of total expenditures that includes construction, large equipment expenses and improvements to existing structures, totaled $76.3 billion or 10.1% of total expenditures.

Instructional salaries, the largest expenditure within current spending, totaled $239.9 billion in fiscal year 2019 or 31.9% of total expenditures for public elementary-secondary education.

Total expenditure increased by 4.7% while total revenue increased by 4.5% from fiscal year 2018.

Where School Funding Comes From

In FY 2019, state governments contributed the largest share of funding to public school systems: $350.9 billion or 46.7%.

Local sources of revenue were the next largest at $342.9 billion or 45.6%, and the federal government contributed the least, $57.9 billion or 7.7%.

The 2019 Annual Survey of School System Finances includes data on revenues, expenditures, debt and assets (cash and security holdings) of elementary and secondary public school systems.

Please note that the data released today were collected before the COVID-19 pandemic took hold in the United States. A preliminary report on 2020 fiscal year school finances data is scheduled to be released this fall.

Full report

Education Research Report: U.S. Spending on Public Schools in 2019 Highest Since 2008

Private schools could end up with no public money if they press too hard

Private schools could end up with no public money if they press too hard

Could public money finance private-school discrimination, religion and fake history?

If states can't control what's taught with taxpayer money, the upshot could be ending charter schools and public funds for private tuition altogether.

With bills pending in more than 20 state legislatures to expand private school voucher programs, this spring could usher in the biggest transfer in funds from public schools to private schools in our nation’s history. But something more is at stake with this new round of voucher legislation: When the public pays for private schooling, will the public get to decide how taxpayer dollars are used in private settings, or will the public be forced to abandon norms as simple and fundamental as nondiscrimination?

The problem started last year when the Supreme Court held in Espinoza v. Montana that states cannot adopt blanket policies to exclude religious schools from voucher programs. The court left open the possibility that states could still place limits on what private schools do with the money. States might still prohibit them from using public money to teach religion or discriminate based on religion, race, sex, gender, sexual orientation and other protected classes.

But choice advocates argue these minimal requirements are unconstitutional, too. 

Satisfied slaves, divine intervention

This distinction is lost on a lot of states, which make no attempt to stop private schools from using public dollars to teach religion, discriminate or deliver curriculum that flies in the face of historical and scientific facts. Students in North Carolina, Florida and Indiana have tried to use their vouchers at religious schools only to be turned away because they didn't fit the CONTINUE READING: Private schools could end up with no public money if they press too hard

John Thompson: Oklahoma Takes The Economic Guardrails Off - Network For Public Education

John Thompson: Oklahoma Takes The Economic Guardrails Off - Network For Public Education

John Thompson: Oklahoma Takes The Economic Guardrails Off

John Thompson has been tracking Oklahoma shenanigans. This time, he’s watching the governor play games with poverty statistics while the legislature takes steps to further privatize the education system.

Across the nation, too many corporate school reformers are using alt facts when attacking traditional public schools as they struggle with the COVID-19 pandemic. Last week, a particularly disgusting one-two punch was thrown at high-poverty Oklahoma public schools. This assault is especially deserving of fact checking. Fortunately, the Network for Public Education blog also posted a link to the Rutgers University Shanker Institute’s School Finance Indicators Database project, and its new dataset, the District Cost Database, which updates the evidence of what it would actually take to bring every district’s test scores up to the national average.

As explained by Oklahoma Watch’s Jennifer Palmer, the Republican-controlled legislature and the governor rammed through a change in the school funding formula, which had cushioned districts with declining enrollments from the need to make rushed budgetary cuts. The value of such a buffer, I would add, is most clear during a crisis such as the pandemic.

But, Gov. Stitt proclaimed the new funding formula and a student transfer bill as “the most transformative education reform legislation in Oklahoma history.”

In fact, as State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister responded, “This bill removes financial safeguards meant to protect all students from the abrupt changes in the local economy. CONTINUE READING: John Thompson: Oklahoma Takes The Economic Guardrails Off - Network For Public Education

A 30-year Fight for School Funding Equity Ends in a Resounding Victory | Schott Foundation for Public Education

A 30-year Fight for School Funding Equity Ends in a Resounding Victory | Schott Foundation for Public Education

A 30-year Fight for School Funding Equity Ends in a Resounding Victory

The 2021-22 New York State budget meets a thirty-year-old demand and thirteen-year-old broken promise: equitably fund New York State's public schools so that no matter what zip code a child resides in, there is a baseline of quality their public schools can afford to meet.

The massive, downright Dickensian difference in funding between schools that sometimes are mere blocks from each other has been a hallmark of New York's public education system for generations. In 2012, a Schott Foundation report on the particularly stark disparities in New York City described it as education redlining: schools with predominantly white children were far better funded — and unsurprisingly, had higher academic outcomes — than schools with predominantly Black and Latinx children. We found a similar disparity with income as well. As the report concluded, "A Black or Hispanic student, or a student of any race or ethnicity from a low-income household, is most likely to be enrolled in one of the city’s poorest performing high schools."

By 2012 it shouldn't have been that way. Five years earlier, in 2007, the 13-year Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit concluded in a victory for public schools: New York State agreed, under court mandate, to commit more than $5.5 billion in funding over four years to equitably fund all public schools. 70% of that funding was to go to the lowest-income school districts, whose property tax bases couldn't compare with those of wealthier cities and neighborhoods. However, this funding, known as Foundation Aid, never fully materialized. Between the 2008 financial crisis and a wave of budget cuts by legislators, what should have been a decade of equity became one of austerity. And as is always the case when state governments tighten their belts, low-income and BIPOC residents bore the brunt of it.

But the Campaign for Fiscal Equity was always more than just a lawsuit: it was at the heart of a renaissance of education CONTINUE READING: A 30-year Fight for School Funding Equity Ends in a Resounding Victory | Schott Foundation for Public Education

The Adequacy of School District Spending in the U.S. – School Finance 101

The Adequacy of School District Spending in the U.S. – School Finance 101

The Adequacy of School District Spending in the U.S.

New Project at School Finance Indicators Database

With Matt Di Carlo & Mark Weber

Full research brief

Press release

Dataset

Data visualization

It’s fairly common knowledge that U.S. school districts vary widely in terms of funding. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, in an ideal school funding system, we would expect to see differences between districts in their spending levels, even big differences, for the simple reason that the cost of educating students varies a great deal across districts. 

For instance, some districts serve larger shares of high-need students than others, and the former require more resources to achieve a given level of student performance. Similarly, like any employer, districts have to pay competitive wages, and labor costs also vary substantially by location. Teachers in areas with high costs of living, for example, have to be paid more than their colleagues in small rural towns where living is less expensive. 

In short, unequal spending is acceptable and even desirable if it is aligned with unequal costs. The key question is whether districts have the resources to meet their students’ needs. In other words, is school district spending adequate?

This research brief presents key findings from a new public database of funding adequacy for over 12,000 U.S. public school districts. The database (the District Cost Database) allows one to compare each district’s actual per-pupil spending with estimates of adequate per-pupil spending levels—that is, spending levels that would be required to achieve the goal of U.S. average test scores (a common “benchmark” with which the models assess adequacy). The data are for the 2017-18 school year.

The brief reports some good news. Thousands of districts enjoy funding levels above and beyond estimated adequate levels. You can find these districts in every single U.S. state. In some cases, funding is two or three times higher than the targets. Even in states such as Arizona and New Mexico, where large majorities of students attend schools in underfunded districts, there are numerous districts in which spending exceeds estimated requirements.

Yet these districts co-exist with thousands of other school systems, some located within driving distance or even in the next town over, where investment is so poorly aligned with need that funding levels are a fraction of estimated costs. Districts with negative funding gaps are CONTINUE READING: The Adequacy of School District Spending in the U.S. – School Finance 101

Closing America’s Education Funding Gaps

Closing America’s Education Funding Gaps

Closing America’s Education Funding Gaps

America is in the midst of a profound political reckoning. Against the backdrop of an unprecedented public health crisis and steadily rising death toll, a historically deep economic recession, and widespread protests against police brutality and racial injustice, people across the country are awakening and grappling anew with longstanding issues of inequality, opportunity, and justice—and confronting the hard truths of the American experience for people of color.

One of the starkest examples of this inequality, as well as a leading cause of it, is our nation’s highly unequal and highly segregated K–12 public education system. By underinvesting in our public schools, we rob millions of American children—particularly Black, brown, and low-income children—of the opportunity to succeed. Inequality, in effect, begins at birth.

While we have known for decades that the United States is failing in its commitment to provide equal educational opportunity, there is far less consensus and understanding of how to reverse these trends. Now, for the first time ever, The Century Foundation (TCF) has calculated the level of investment needed to lift up every student in the country that is currently falling behind. In other words, in this report we estimate what it would cost to provide each child in America—no matter their background—with the opportunity to succeed in school.

Inequality begins in childhood: The United States is underfunding our public schools by nearly $150 billion annually, robbing millions of children—predominantly minority and low-income children—of the opportunity to succeed.

We can begin to restore the promise of public education by simply investing more in our students and in our schools. A wide-ranging and rigorous body of research makes it clear: spending matters in education. More specifically, greater investments in schools translate to improved student outcomes, and these outcomes are more pronounced and significant for low-income and minority students.

Across a range of metrics, U.S. students score lower than students in other developed nations, and these outcomes vary significantly along racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines. At the same time, state- and district-level data show wide variation in educational spending across the country. Some school districts and states spend vastly more per pupil, and pay educators much higher wages, than others. Not surprisingly, variation in education spending largely overlaps with variation in student outcomes. In general, where states invest more in public schools, students tend to achieve higher scores and perform better.

To calculate exactly “how much” more spending is needed, TCF partnered with the nation’s leading school finance expert, Bruce D. Baker, Ed.D., of Rutgers University Graduate School of Education, to develop a first-of-its-kind national cost model study. Our model estimates what it would cost for students to achieve national average outcomes on reading and math assessments by 2021 for every school district in the country, more than 13,000 in total.

For the majority of school districts in the country (7,224 in total, serving almost two-thirds of public school students, or more than 30 million children in total), bringing students up to the nation’s current average outcomes requires greater public investment, enough to fill what we call a “funding gap.” The remaining districts currently provide funding at or above what our model estimates is needed to achieve average outcomes, and thus have no funding gap.1

We have visualized the findings of the model in a nationwide map, available above. The interactive map allows users to identify what, if any, funding gap exists for a particular school district or state. It includes estimates for both aggregate and per-pupil funding gaps in each school district and state, which serve to tell us the following:

• Aggregate funding gaps provide the overall scope of the investment needed in each jurisdiction. In districts and states with larger populations of students, these aggregate gaps will be larger.
• Per-pupil funding gaps, on the other hand, allow comparisons across districts and states, irrespective of population size.

In addition, we include two different estimates for what it would cost to close the gap:

• The first represents the cost to states and districts if they acted swiftly to close the gap within one year.
• The second represents the costs to localities if they scale up and phase in spending over five years to close the gap (the map below).

CONTINUE READING: Closing America’s Education Funding Gaps

PIE Network | Distribution of Education Funds in the American Rescue Plan - PIE Network

PIE Network | Distribution of Education Funds in the American Rescue Plan - PIE Network

Distribution of Education Funds in the American Rescue Plan

Updated March 15, 2021

Questions, or interested in adding to this document? Reach out to Patrick.  PIE Network | Distribution of Education Funds in the American Rescue Plan - PIE Network

We Need a Bigger Pie – Tennessee Education Report

We Need a Bigger Pie – Tennessee Education Report

WE NEED A BIGGER PIE

The League of Women Voters (LWV) is calling on Gov. Bill Lee and the Tennessee General Assembly to take bold action on school funding. The group notes that the state historically underfunds schools and suggests that now is the time to change that reality. In fact, the push from the LWV comes as the state is experiencing an unprecedented revenue surplus.

Here’s more from LWV from a media release:

Chronically underfunded school districts throughout the  state have been especially challenged during the pandemic. However, the inadequacies and  the gross underfunding predate this stressful year. Tennessee currently funds its public school  system at a level that consistently places it in the bottom five most poorly funded states in the  United States, per the National Education Association.

“This goes beyond how you slice the pie to provide varying amounts of funding to the diverse  counties of our state – the pie itself is simply not big enough,” said Debby Gould, president elect of LWVTN. “The League’s position on education is that the state’s coverage,  implementation, and funding of the Basic Education Program CONTINUE READING: We Need a Bigger Pie – Tennessee Education Report

A few thoughts on School Funding and Pandemic Relief – School Finance 101

A few thoughts on School Funding and Pandemic Relief – School Finance 101

A few thoughts on School Funding and Pandemic Relief

I keep getting asked the same questions regarding my thoughts on the current stimulus proposals for schools. So here’s a quick attempt at summarizing my thoughts.

The pandemic has had at least three different types of effects on school funding.

First, the pandemic has highlighted the need for a short term infusion of resources to make existing schools safer and healthier for existing staff and students, increasing expenses for things such as cleaning supplies, PPE and technology expansion for increased remote access. While these things can add up, they are still probably the smallest among these financial issues facing schools and states in this moment. Still, they must be addressed, both for short term purposes and so that we learn better how to handle similar situations in the future.

The second issue is the fact that the pandemic has created significant shortfalls in state budgets which have yet to be resolved by an appropriately structured federal stimulus package. When state budgets take a hit like this, and income and sales tax revenues dip, there’s usually a large sharp dip for 1 to 3 years, followed by a long slow recovery. We learned a lot from the last great recession. This one is, and will be different in some ways. State budgets and by extension general aid to local school districts will need significant general support for ongoing expenses for the CONTINUE READING: A few thoughts on School Funding and Pandemic Relief – School Finance 101

Education Law Center Exposes Collapse of States’ Investment in Public Schools Since 2008 | janresseger

Education Law Center Exposes Collapse of States’ Investment in Public Schools Since 2008 | janresseger

Education Law Center Exposes Collapse of States’ Investment in Public Schools Since 2008

One of the ways we attribute meaning to what we see is through stories.  Here is the story of my school district. We are among the top districts in Ohio in the local school property taxes we have voted.  But our district was forced to cut teachers and programs this year, and the teachers almost went on strike because of threatened cuts to their health care benefits despite that, in November, we passed yet another local school property tax operating levy. When my children were in elementary school in the 1980s and early 1990s, each school had a nurse and each school had a certified librarian, but now schools share nurses and the libraries are staffed by aides. Looking at this situation from a purely local point of view, many people in my community interpret these facts in a way that blames the district for mismanagement or salaries that are too high, or both.

But a new report from The Education Law Center insists that citizens must expand their understanding of funding public schools beyond the local story: “The political dynamics in state capitols have profound implications for the level and distribution of school funding. Nationally, state sources (mainly sales and income tax) provide 47%, and local sources (overwhelmingly from property taxes) provide 45% of the revenue to support public schools. The federal government contributes the remaining 8%. When state governments allow tax revenues to decline or remain stagnant, public schools, which states are legally obligated to maintain and support, pay the price. Elementary and secondary education on average accounts for 36% of states’ general fund spending, the most of any state government services.”

The Education Law Center’s new report, $600 Billion Lost: State Disinvestment in Education Following the Great Recession, sets the financial crisis in my school district and a mass of other school districts in a much clearer context. The Education Law Center blames state policy over more than a decade as the primary cause of our dilemma. I already had some understanding of the current fiscal problems for the nation’s public schools because, for years, I have been reading reports on this topic from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (see this example).  But the new report is short, up to date, readable, and extremely important for CONTINUE READING: Education Law Center Exposes Collapse of States’ Investment in Public Schools Since 2008 | janresseger

Ohio Senate Killed New School Funding Plan: Now We Hear That Money Doesn’t Matter | janresseger

Ohio Senate Killed New School Funding Plan: Now We Hear That Money Doesn’t Matter | janresseger

Ohio Senate Killed New School Funding Plan: Now We Hear That Money Doesn’t Matter

Ohio Auditor Keith Faber explained on Tuesday that, “The Auditor of State’s Office recently completed a performance audit for the Ohio Department of Education.” Faber says that the purpose is to make recommendations about “economy, efficiency, and/or effectiveness in the areas reviewed…”

One of the subjects of the new report from the Ohio Auditor’s office is the correlation of school districts’ expenditure per pupil with their school performance as measured by standardized tests.  Here, from the Performance Audit Summary, is what the Auditor discovered: “Conclusion: Expenditure per pupil has a loose association with Achievement in Ohio, particularly at the high performing districts.  As total district spending increases, there is no single expenditure category driving this increase.”  Later in the body of the report, the Auditor states: “The analyses in this section indicate that it is not necessary for districts to spend more to get better results. The data show that lower spending districts can achieve at the same level as higher spending districts, a point which parents and taxpayers should take into consideration in their personal decision-making surrounding financial and performance issues in their district. ODE and LEAs should consider if there is a point of diminishing returns in spending, where additional district revenue and expenditures will not necessarily increase student success.”

The Plain Dealer‘s Emily Bamforth digs deeper, explaining to readers that one purpose of the Audit was to discover which practices in high spending school districts are most essential for CONTINUE READING: Ohio Senate Killed New School Funding Plan: Now We Hear That Money Doesn’t Matter | janresseger

An educator’s hope for the next two years | Eclectablog

An educator’s hope for the next two years | Eclectablog

An educator’s hope for the next two years

The following essay was written by Tina Beveridge. Tina is a veteran music educator of 17 years and is currently a 2nd year PhD student in music education at the University of Miami. It was first posted on her own blog Insert brilliant title here…

---

Reader, I’m not going to lie. I felt an enormous weight lift when President Biden was sworn in last week.

But, as my next-door neighbor while discussing the events of January, “Now the work REALLY starts.” As a music educator I felt that statement in my bones.

Education at the moment is a mess, not least of all because of the inconsistent hodgepodge systems being used for the pandemic. But public education is also suffering from four years of deliberate sabotage and twenty years of “reform” policies, which all stem from either a misdirected goal of erasing inequality through education or to completely privatize education.

It’s ironic that the reformers all claim to want the same thing — better educational opportunities and outcomes without spending more money! — but have wildly different definitions about what that means, or which children they mean to help. And, of course, the pandemic has exacerbated all of these conflicts, with one result being a record number of teachers leaving the profession. Because who wants to be blamed when the policies fail and not even be able to fully support yourself from the salary? Or to receive CONTINUE READING: An educator’s hope for the next two years | Eclectablog

Biden’s Education Plan Addressed Lagging School Funding: Now with a Democratic Senate Majority, He Needs to Act | janresseger

Biden’s Education Plan Addressed Lagging School Funding: Now with a Democratic Senate Majority, He Needs to Act | janresseger

Biden’s Education Plan Addressed Lagging School Funding: Now with a Democratic Senate Majority, He Needs to Act

President Elect Joe Biden prioritized public school funding as the center of his education plan during his campaign to be the Democratic nominee for President.  Why did he prioritize public school finance and why is it so urgently important in 2021?

Here are Jack Schneider and Jennifer Berkshire, in their new book, The Wolf at the Schoolhouse Door, explaining the problem: “Almost every state reduced spending on public education during the Great Recession, but some states went much further, making deep cuts to schools, while taking aim at teachers and their unions… Moreover, states including Arizona, Kansas, Michigan, and North Carolina also moved to permanently reduce the funds available for education by cutting the taxes that pay for schools and other public services.  In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker took aim at education through Act 10—what was first called the ‘budget repair bill.’  Act 10 is remembered for stripping teachers and other public employees of their collective bargaining rights.  But it also made $2 billion in cuts to the state’s public schools.” (The Wolf at the Schoolhouse Door, pp. 35-36)

In August of 2018, the late Jim Siegel at the Columbus Dispatch summarized an important report by Ohio’s school finance expert, Howard Fleeter: “Nearly 77 percent of the total revenue increase from state funding and local taxes in the past 20 years occurred before 2009, according to a new analysis by the Ohio Education Policy Institute… State funding increased 35 percent from 1999 to 2009, but in the past 10 years it has actually fallen nearly 2 percent CONTINUE READING: Biden’s Education Plan Addressed Lagging School Funding: Now with a Democratic Senate Majority, He Needs to Act | janresseger