America’s Least Fairly Funded School Districts

Posted by on June 18, 2012

The biggest losers

As an accompaniment to School Finance 101’s upcoming annual report on school funding fairness, Bruce Baker identifies some of the country’s least fairly funded districts, focusing on large and mid-sized cities. He presents two lists — large, midsize, and small cities, and fringe districts of large, midsize, and small cities — in each case selecting districts where the combined state and local revenue per pupil is less than the average for districts in the same labor market, and the U.S. Census Poverty rate for the district is over 50 percent higher than the average for districts in the same labor market. Baker makes the point that districts with higher student needs than surrounding districts don’t just require the same total revenue per pupil — they require more. Higher-need districts need more money to recruit and retain similar quantities (per pupil) of similar-quality teachers — in other words, to pay a wage premium. In addition, higher-need districts require additional program/service supports for helping kids from disadvantaged backgrounds (including smaller classes in early grades) while still maintaining advanced and enriched course options. Using these guidelines, Baker lists the biggest losers, finding Chicago, Philadelphia, and Bridgeport, Connecticut to be among the least well-funded cities, all with much higher poverty than their surroundings.

Read more: http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2012/06/02/americas-most-screwed-city-schools-where-are-the-least-fairly-funded-city-districts/