Shortchanging Disadvantaged Students: An Analysis of Intra-district Spending Patterns in Ohio
(Full policy report available in PDF format above)
One of the reasons that school finance has remained such a central issue in Ohio is the continued poor performance of high-poverty schools. Despite prolonged legislative activity, the achievement gap between white and minority students and between property-rich and property-poor school districts persists. The lack of progress is all the more troubling given the steady increases in overall funding to the system.
Legislative efforts to provide supplemental resources for disadvantaged students are well-conceived; however, the findings of this report demonstrate that the money earmarked for this purpose is not reaching its target. Put simply, state equity efforts are being contravened by the way that districts allocate their funds to individual school buildings.
To date, most studies of the equity of Ohio’s school finance system have focused on the differences in expenditures between school districts. Creating a World-Class Education System in Ohio, a report commissioned by the Ohio Department of Education, concluded: “Though the State funds districts based on the number and needs of the students in them, districts may–or may not–distribute money in the same way.
Districts, especially larger ones, tend to use staffing allocations to distribute funding. However, these allocations are often a result of central office decisions and collective bargaining agreements, which do not necessarily reflect student need.”
In our study of 72 high-poverty school systems during the 2005-06 school year, the difference between what individual school buildings should have spent based on the demographics of their student population and what they actually spent per pupil resulted in nearly $300 million being diverted from students who are disadvantaged, in special education programs, or gifted.
Over 167,000 students attended schools in which funding per student was lower than it should have been according to state policy. Just over 119,000 attended schools in which funding was higher than policy called for.
From these findings, there is reason to believe that general, or even focused, increases in state funding will continue to have little to no effect on increasing student achievement or reducing the achievement gap. Despite the fact that state funds are allocated based on characteristics of the student populations in districts, the state funding program is, in fact, a weighted-district funding, not a weighted-student funding system.
To solve the problem of funding inequity in the state, Ohio should implement quality controls to ensure that intended weighted-student funding is actually following designated students to their school buildings. Employing building-based budgeting is one mechanism to guarantee that wealthy schools within districts are not siphoning off the resources that have been appropriated to help close the achievement gap.
Matthew Carr is the Education Policy Director at the Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, a research and educational institute located in Columbus, Ohio. Marc Holley and Nathan Gray are doctoral fellows at the University of Arkansas.
