News
School Funding Adequacy--What It Costs To Do the Job Right

'Adequacy' defined: After you crank out educational standards, you cost out what it takes to implement them. It's really that simple.

If you ran a company, would you build a state-of-the-art production facility by obsessing over blueprints and directives to your contractors-without ever inquiring about their choice of materials and skilled labor, or wondering if the completed building had the capacity to produce quality products?

That's the course many state legislators follow for public education, drafting tough standards without inquiring what it really costs for teachers and education support professionals to implement them. Instead, lawmakers haggle over what they can afford and work backward from there.

There is a far smarter method for allocating resources needed to meet standards for student achievement and school accountability, something education finance experts call "adequacy."

In this process, the components of an adequate, quality education-required by statute, standards, or court decisions-are costed out and funded by the state on an ongoing basis, with adjustments for inflation, enrollment increases, and changing student needs.

Don't dismiss this as funding fantasy. At the start of this school year, NEA members in at least two states, Maryland and Wyoming, are well down the road to funding adequacy, thanks to coalition work and the long shadow of past school finance lawsuits.

Since the late 1980s, state high courts across the nation have increasingly ruled in school funding cases that existing funding methods violate state constitutional mandates for a "thorough and efficient," "adequate," or "ample" system of public education.

After looking at the law and the ever-tougher standards, courts have tended to rule that existing funding can't help prepare all students to compete in today's competitive marketplace or become citizens capable of, say, serving on juries in complex cases.

"And time and again," notes Ohio Education Association school finance expert Russ Harris, "courts have ruled that education is a state responsibility and that there is just one state school system. The state has a constitutional responsibility to design a fair and adequate system, and while it can delegate authority to school districts, it can't delegate that responsibility."

And the state's other responsibility, the courts inevitably conclude, is to cost out and fund the components of an equitable and adequate public education system.

That's just common sense. And that, in effect, is accountability--something that ought to apply to governors and legislators as much as it does to teachers and ESP.

--D.W.

NEA Affiliates Pursue Different Paths to Adequacy

In reports from the field, the word 'coalition' keeps cropping up.

School funding "adequacy" can become a reality through research into the true costs of a quality education, coalition work, willingness to dig in for the long haul, and-yes-willingness to file lawsuits when legislators drag their heels.

That's the quick and dirty from NEA state affiliates on the front line of the battle for funding reform. Here's a progress report from several states:

• Maryland: Sanity Without Lawsuits... Miracle of miracles: In this election year, in the face of an $800 million budget deficit, Maryland's legislature and governor fully endorsed recommendations of the state Thornton Commission, appointed in 1999 to develop a school finance structure based on adequacy.

  The bottom line: Public schools across the state will receive $1.3 billion in additional funding by 2008, on top of $884 million in already-scheduled increases. By the 2007-08 school year, school systems must provide full-day kindergarten for all students and must make pre-kindergarten programs available for all economically disadvantaged four-year-olds.

  The state's per-pupil "foundation" amount will increase from $4,124 to $5,443 (excluding the costs of employee retirement and four federal general ed programs) through a six-year phase-in period that begins in fiscal year 2003-and will keep tracking inflation.

  Moreover, higher "factors" will be added into a student's foundation amount if he or she has special needs, is economically disadvantaged, or has limited English language skills.

  For the first two years, this package will be funded by a tobacco tax hike.

  The Thornton Commission, which included Betsy Moyer, executive director of the Maryland State Teachers Association, costed out the price of classroom quality through two nationally accepted methods-"professional judgment" panels of teachers and other education stakeholders that modeled "prototype" schools to meet state standards, and a "successful schools" analysis of the actual costs paid by 59 high-achieving Maryland schools.

  This new funding, coupled with MSTA-backed legislation that expands educator bargaining rights, "gives us the ability to bring quality issues beyond the usual bread-and-butter stuff to the bargaining table," enthuses MSTA President Pat Foerster.

• Wyoming: A Big Bump In Educator Pay... It's taken three successive state Supreme Court decisions to move Wyoming legislators off the dime, and the court has made it clear this case isn't closed yet. But thanks to continuous pressure from the Wyoming Education Coalition, the legislature must now-in compliance with a 2001 court ruling-adjust spending every two years for inflation; make all school facilities "safe and efficient" by July 1, 2008; and review all components of its "cost-based" funding model every five years to ensure it does reflect costs.

  The Wyoming Supreme Court also called for an adjustment of teacher, ESP, and administrator salaries to "account for differences in experience, responsibility, and authority." Accordingly, Wyoming teachers received an average 9.12 percent pay increase between school years 2000-01 and 2001-02, boosting them from 42nd to 35th in NEA's 2001-02 teacher rankings.

  "The coalition the Wyoming Education Association helped create is the reason we've been successful," stresses WEA staffer Ron Sniffin. "In the last legislative session, we added school business officials to our ranks. They've been very effective advocates."

• Ohio: In For The Long Haul... Since 1991, when the Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy in School Funding-formed with help from NEA's state affiliate-first filed suit over the constitutionality of school spending, the state Supreme Court has been forced to rule three times on the issue.

  In its most recent decision, in 2001, the court determined that the state had manipulated three costing-out studies to lower the per-pupil support level, now creeping in steps up to $4,061.

  "Ohio still doesn't have a per-pupil foundation level that has any substantial relationship to the actual cost of delivering educational services," fumes E&A Coalition Executive Director William L. Phillis. "The state doesn't have a clue to the funding needed."

  But through the haze, the State of Ohio does perceive the bright light of unity. The E&A Coalition includes more than 550 of Ohio's 611 school districts, and serving on its steering committee is Ohio Education Association President Gary Allen.

  "The state knows these plaintiff districts will not disappear," stresses OEA staffer Russ Harris. "Because of their litigation, the state has invested $3 billion in new school facilities since 1997, and $675 million in equity funds in low-wealth districts-and we've won some good new case law. Moreover, the state has admitted that its funding system is inadequate, inequitable, and morally wrong."

• Montana and Indiana: Making Politicians Accountable... Over the past decade, the Montana state government's share of K-12 public school fund costs has fallen from 71.4 percent to 61.3 percent. The result: program cuts, average teacher salaries that rank 48th in the nation, and an exodus of university education program graduates.

  NEA's Montana affiliate, MEA-MFT, has responded by spearheading two statewide pro-education coalitions, one of which is now conducting a costing-out study to prepare for a possible finance adequacy lawsuit. The other coalition, Stand Up For Education (SUFE), is taking the case for improved education funding directly to the public.

  Last spring, SUFE conducted 10 highly visible public forums across Montana, in which taxpayers, reporters, and even legislators heard shocking firsthand accounts of the crisis in K-12 and higher education funding, many delivered by MEA-MFT members.

  "People who attended the hearings get it; the press gets it," says MEA-MFT staffer Sanna Porte. "The problems are worse than they thought. There's simply not enough state funding to keep our public schools and colleges strong."

  "This fall," Porte adds, "MEA-MFT is conducting a nonpartisan media campaign urging voters to pose specific questions to candidates concerning their support for public education."

  And back in the Hoosier State, the Indiana State Teachers Association plans to pin down political hopefuls on their level of support for resources needed to effectively implement an accountability law and standards passed in the last legislative session by a unanimous vote.

  "In the 2003 session, we hope to get funding for planning and pilot programs that address the achievement gap and help children who are not meeting our new standards," says ISTA Deputy Executive Director Dan Clark.

  Leaving nothing to chance, ISTA is conducting its own "professional judgment" cost analysis to back its arguments and is planning to join a new Statewide Achievement Gap Coalition.

  "Coalition work is essential," says Clark. "In Indiana, we work in an environment where 70 to 80 percent of adults don't have children in public school. If we don't make connections to the business community and other advocates for children, we can't reach the level of financial support we need."

--Dave Winans

Adequacy: Just One Piece Of a Bigger Puzzle

The very idea of education funding adequacy may seem irrelevant to you if your state is facing a steep budget deficit. But consider these points from NEA Research staffer Michael Kahn, who works on education finance and economic issues:

• Courts may issue great school funding adequacy decisions, but they can't write tax laws. Many states have built-in budget deficits because of archaic, piecemeal tax systems that have become more reliant on user fees or gambling revenue. These structures often shift much of the tax burden from corporations to average homeowners and the poor and don't capture growth in booming areas such as the service sector and Internet commerce.

• There can be a saner tax system. It must be stable, balanced, elastic, and based on an economic development policy that doesn't trade off adequate education funding for new business investment-the two work together.

• Quality education demands a balance of factors. The list includes funding equity and adequacy, a balanced tax system, pay for quality teachers (which in real terms hasn't changed in 30 years), proper funding for facilities and technology, and alignment of federal, state, and local fiscal responsibilities.

• Accountability comes with a price tag. The current standards and accountability movement affords NEA members a golden opportunity to link accountability to funding adequacy. The public understands that one can't be held fully accountable unless he or she is given sufficient resources to do the job.