The document discusses equitable school funding and resource allocation. It defines equitable funding as schools receiving resources comparable to student needs and what is required to reach high learning goals, rather than equal funding based only on size. It shows funding inequities between states, districts, and schools. Schools with more students in poverty often receive less funding and have lower student outcomes. The document advocates for allocating more resources to schools with higher student needs to support all students reaching high standards. Districts should ensure equitable and transparent funding across schools.

1. © Education Resource Strategies, Inc., 2018
Advancing Equitable
School Funding
NASBE Legislative Conference, March 6, 2018

2. 1
▪ What do we mean by “equity”?
▪ What would it mean to allocate resources
equitably?
▪ What tools do ESSA requirements provide?
▪ How will we make sure it matters?
Agenda

3. 2
Equal Funding
Schools get comparable resources
based on size and/or other fixed
allocation drivers.
Equitable Funding
Schools get resources that are
comparable based on student needs
and what it will take to reach high
learning goals.
With empowering, rigorous learning standards for all
children…

4. 3
Spending levels vary significantly across
States
Districts
Schools
Classrooms

5. 4
Inequities we can see today: between states
Source: Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education, National Center for Education Statistics 2013-14
More than $15,000
$10,000 - $12,999
$9,000 - $10,999
Less than $9,000
Utah: $6,546
New York:
$20,156
$13,000- $14,999

6. 5
Between states: even adjusted for cost of living,
highest spending state spends nearly 3X the lowest
$6.5K
$19.6K
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
Utah
Arizona
Idaho
Nevada
Texas
NorthCarolina
California
Georgia
Colorado
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Florida
Washington
Mississippi
Virginia
Alabama
Indiana
Kentucky
SouthCarolina
NewMexico
Oregon
Michigan
Missouri
Minnesota
Arkansas
SouthDakota
Ohio
Wisconsin
Kansas
Louisiana
Iowa
Illinois
Hawaii
Maryland
WestVirginia
Delaware
Nebraska
Pennsylvania
Massachusetts
Montana
NorthDakota
RhodeIsland
NewHampshire
Maine
NewJersey
Connecticut
NewYork
Alaska
Wyoming
Vermont
Total K12 Per Pupil Expenditure, 2013-14 (adjusted for geography)
Source: NCES; per-pupil expenditures adjusted using CWI; ERS analysis
National median = $11K
While spending levels don’t predict outcomes,
they limit or create possibility.

7. 6
Inequities we can see today: between districts
 High-poverty districts receive roughly $1,000 / student
less than low-poverty districts around the country.
 In 16 states high-poverty districts receive less per pupil
than low-poverty districts.

8. 7Source: Funding Gaps 2018, The Education Trust
Gaps in State and Local Revenues per Student Between Districts Serving
the Most and the Fewest Students in Poverty
-25%
-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
UT
OH
MN
NJ
SD
GA
NC
AR
DE
LA
WA
MD
SC
CA
IN
VA
CO
OK
KY
OR
MA
NM
WI
NE
KS
ND
AZ
CT
VT
TN
MT
FL
MS
PA
IA
ID
WV
ME
WY
NH
TX
RI
MI
AL
NY
MO
IL
Progressive Moderately Progressive Neutral Moderately Regressive Regressive
Inequities we can see today: between districts

9. 8
Unfortunately, we know that the concentration of
poverty predicts outcomes in most cases
Data on school average proficiency from 4 large districts
R² = 0.74
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
R² = 0.81
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
R² = 0.72
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
R² = 0.77
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
A B
C D
ELAProficiency15-16
% FRL

10. 9
School-level concentration of poverty lowers
performance for ALL students
Source: ERS Analysisof 8 large districtsacross 8 states
89
83 82
74
56
67
63 62
56
40
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0-19% 80-100%
PercentofStudentsRatedProficient
20-39% 40-59% 60-79%
Percent of Poverty Students in School
Student Performance vs. School Level
Concentration ofPoverty
Non-Economically DisadvantagedStudent Economically DisadvantagedStudent

11. 10
Inequities we don’t see today: between schools
Source: ERS Analysis; District Financial File 2016
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
Elementary Schools Middle
Median $5.8K
Hi-Lo Spread 1.6X
District Example- ERS analysis
School Level Gen Ed. Dollar per Gen Ed. Student by School
Excludes Federal Funds
High
Median $7.0K
Hi-Lo Spread 1.9X
Median
$6.5K
Hi-Lo
Spread
1.6X
Secondary schools tend to be higher funded than elementary schools.

12. 11
Districts do not intentionally allocate resources
inequitably
…but district policies often
unintentionally create inequity.
Funding inequity is
never intentional…

13. 12
Most districts use average (as opposed to actual)
teacher salary for budgeting which disguises inequity
Using average salary School A School B
District average salary $60,000 $60,000
Number of teachers 10 10
Budgeted for salary $600,000 $600,000
Though the district
would appear to be
making an equal
investment in these
schools on an average
salary basis…
…School B actually
invests $300k more
than School A
Using actual salary School A School B
Novice teachers earning $30,000 each 5 0
Mid-level teachers earning $60,000 each 5 5
Experienced teachers earning $90,000 each 0 5
Actual salary $450,000 $750,000

14. 13
Identifying drivers of spending variation within
districts
District Strategy
School opening/ closure
$
School Level
$
School Type
$
Student Need
Special
Education
$$$
English Language
Learners
$$
Economic
Disadvantage
$$
Other Student Needs
$
Unplanned
Enrollment/
School Size
$$$
Teacher Compensation
$
Building Utilization
$
Enrollment Projections
$
Ad-hoc exceptions
$

15. 14
 Low and declining funding in a growing number of states
 Most states do not provide significantly more to districts
with higher concentrations of students living in poverty
 Districts don’t systematically ensure equitable funding
across schools and they don’t report it either
 Per-pupil spending data doesn’t tell the whole story—it
needs more interpretation to be useful
Let’s review

16. 15
Defining “equity” – a tale of two schools
Sky Blue Academy Green Street H.S.
9-12
550
22
84%
9-12
565
23
82%
Grades
Students
Teachers
Pct Poverty (FRL)
$12,960 $13,080

17. 16
Defining “equity” – a tale of two schools
13%
10% / 3%
7%
100%
24%
11% / 13%
22%
35%
Special Ed
Resource / Self-Contained
9th graders in
bottom quartile ELA
Chose to attend school
Sky Blue Academy Green Street H.S.
$12,960 $13,080

18. 17
Defining “equity” – a tale of two schools
% ELA Proficient/Advanced
Sky Blue Academy Green Street H.S.
$12,960 $13,080
20 Year Vet “Star”
Hand-picked
Novice
8 Force placed, 8 subs,
no ELA certified
Principal
Teaching Staff
68% 35%
7% %ELA in Lowest Quartile 22%

19. 18
Resource equity
Resource Equity is the allocation and use of
resources (people, time, and money) to create
student experiences that enable all children to
reach empowering, rigorous learning outcomes
– no matter their race or income.

20. 19
Dimensions of resource equity
Early Learning & Early Intervention
Teaching Quality
School
Funding
School Leadership
Instructional Time & Personalized Attention
Whole Child Approach
Academic Rigor
Diverse and Inclusive Schools
Support for Family Academic Engagement
These dimensions are:
• Informed by research
and effective practice
• Controlled by system
and school leaders
• Driven by school and
system context – there
is no set “recipe” for
great school systems

21. 20
Districts and States are working to create
dashboards that measure these dimensions
There are many factors that influence the quality of education, and the distribution of key
educational resources won’t show up in spending per pupil.
How do these schools compare to the district median?
High $pp Schools Low $pp Schools
A B C X Y Z
% students proficient Below Below Below Above Above Above
Dimension Metric
Teaching Quality
% highly effective teachers Below Below Similar Similar Above Above
% novice teachers Similar Above Above Similar Below Below
School Leadership # of principals in last three years Above Similar Above Below Similar Below
Academic Rigor
% secondary students enrolled
in at least one AP course
Similar Below Below Above Above Similar
# of AP courses offered Below Below Similar Similar Above Above
Instructional
Time
Length of school day (hrs) Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar
Diverse and
Inclusive Schools
% poverty Similar Above Above Below Below Similar
% Black or Latino students Above Above Similar Below Similar Below

22. 21
Organizing for high performance means making big
shifts from traditional ways of organizing
Dimension From: To:
Teaching
Quality
Teaching as an
individual enterprise.
Teamsof teachers whowork together to plan
and adjust instruction so all children reach
learning goals
A“one-size-fits-all”
teaching job.
Roles and assignments that match each
individual’s unique skills and expertise to
needed roles.
Instructional
Time &
Personalized
Attention
Standardized class sizesin
“one-teacherclassrooms.”
Groups of teachers and students that vary
across subjects, activities and students.
Rigid time allocations.
Flexible schedules that allow time to vary with
needs of students.
WholeChild
Investments in culture and
social-emotional support
that remove resources
from coreinstruction.
Investments that are embedded within and
reinforce the school’s core instructional work.

23. 22
▪ Design new teacher and principalcompensation
structures andstaffingmodelsthat attract and keep the
most effective
▪ Shift staffing resources to highest prioritysubjects
▪ Enable more flexible roles in schools that fit today's work
world
▪ Explore innovative ways of delivering instructionthrough
technology and outside partners
▪ Extend and vary instructionaltime
Catalyzing higher performing school designs requires
funding transition investment and flexibility to:

24. 23
 Set funding levels sufficient to support students in
reaching new higher learning standards
 Allocate more dollars to districts and schools with higher
concentrations of poverty
 Ensure policies and supports that enable district and
school leaders to buy and organize the resources they
need to accelerate learning for all students
What would it mean to allocate resources equitably?