The Basics

Start at the top. Who has the responsibility to fund public schools?

Public K-12 education funding comes from three sources. Federal funds largely come from grant programs to support children in poverty or with special needs. State funding generally comes from sales and income taxes, while local funding comes mostly from property tax revenue.  According to the U.S. Department of Education, the Fed covers around 12% of U.S. public education spending, while state and local sources account for 44% each.

And here in Pennsylvania?

In Pa., the funding breakdown is approximately 12% federal revenue, 35% state, and 53% local.  Pennsylvania spends about $10 billion total on K-12 education.  Local contributions vary greatly by district based on property values and tax rates. Average per pupil spending by districts in 2012 (the latest year with data) was $14,000, but with lows under $10,000 and highs of around $30,000.

So what is this state funding formula I keep hearing about?

Not a math person? A funding formula is a method for calculating the amount of money a state sends to districts.  Each state varies, but formulas are often based on the number of students in the district and a base-level amount per pupil.  Some states also add funding based on student or district characteristics that would indicate a higher need.

Why has there been so much talk about the formula in Pa.?

Pennsylvania is one of only a handful of states without an established yearly funding formula that takes into account student and district characteristics. An annual formula was implemented when Ed Rendell was governor, but now the Pennsylvania General Assembly passes a new basic education funding plan each year. Critics say this results in funding being unfairly allocated among districts.

Critics being …the Democratic candidates for governor, I assume.

That would be correct. And it’s a good segue to the next section.

What the Candidates Say

Let’s start with Governor Corbett.

His February budget proposal includes a $240 million grant program for K-12 schools and increases in special education funding. Corbett disputes claims that he is responsible for cuts in education funding during his first term, pointing out that federal stimulus dollars that boosted state funding during the Rendell administration have dried up. But the governor acknowledged in January that the current funding method is outdated, unfair and needs to be reviewed due to the changing demographics of the state’s public schools. Corbett supports creating a funding commission to study the issue.

What about the Democratic candidates?

Rob McCord, Katie McGinty, Allyson Schwartz, and Tom Wolf have all joined the “$1 billion in funding cuts by Corbett” chorus. Each has promised to restore the $1 billion and is calling for an overhaul of the state’s education funding formula.

One by one: What does McGinty say?

McGinty says she will generate funding, in part, with a 4.5 percent tax on natural gas production. She believes Pa. should contribute “on average half the statewide cost of instruction” and, according to her former website, proposes a formula based on the number of students served, average cost of instruction and the ability of a district to generate tax revenue.

And Rob McCord?

McCord’s plan proposes a natural gas tax of 10 percent – the highest among the candidates. He says he will fight for a data-driven funding formula that takes into account enrollment, student characteristics, academic needs and local effort.  McCord notes that with more resources, schools will be able to hire more teachers and staff and reduce class size.

What about Tom Wolf?

Wolf suggests a five percent gas tax and believes the state should work towards increasing its funding contribution to 50 percent. On his website, he emphasizes the unfair and political nature of the state’s current funding system, saying that it “shortchanges too many school districts” and creates “winners and losers” based on where you live and what your legislator can bring home. Wolf is calling for a study to determine what it costs to provide a high-quality education.

And Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz?

Schwartz (who used to serve in the Pa. Senate) has suggested a five percent natural gas tax that she says will raise $13.2 billion over ten years for education, infrastructure and clean energy. She vows to work with all stakeholders to establish a “transparent and predictable” funding formula that will consider student and district characteristics and local effort to fund schools. See her education plan here.

Get More Information

The Education Law Center, a statewide advocacy organization, produced a report highlighting what it believes Pennsylvania can learn from other states’ funding formulas. The Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia, a local group that has brought funding litigation against the state, has called for changes to the Pennsylvania constitution to ensure more equitable funding.

To hear from those who question the relationship between education spending and student achievement and the need for increased funding, check out the policy blog at Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative leaning think tank.

At the National Center for Education Statistics website, you can view data on K-12 public education spending by state.

April 29, 2014