Constitutional School Funding
The Problem and The Solution
THE PROBLEM: Inequitable, Unconstitutional School Funding
The Ohio Constitution requires the legislature to fund a high-quality system of public education. In the 1997 DeRolph v State of Ohio decision, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Ohio’s school funding system was unconstitutional because it failed to provide and distribute adequate resources for quality education across the state, and for its over-reliance on property taxes. Since that first decision in the DeRolph case, there has been no long-term remedy that would make it possible to equalize opportunities across the state.
THE SOLUTION: Fair School Funding Plan
In 2016, Senator Bob Cupp and Representative John Patterson partnered to develop the Fair School Funding Plan, a transparent, sustainable school funding formula that uses research and best practices to determine the actual cost of educating a child. The plan is a comprehensive solution to address Ohio's unconstitutional school funding system. After passing the House in the 133rd General Assembly, the 134th General Assembly only adopted a 2-year partial funding of the plan for the 2021-23 State Budget, which expires in June 2023.
3 Components of the Fair School Funding Plan Funding Formula:
1. Base Cost: actual cost of providing a high quality education to a "typical child" in their district
- 60% for direct classroom instruction
- 15% for Instructional and student supports
- 20% Building leadership and operations
- 5% District Leadership and accountability
- Local share is based on a community's ability to generate funds
- 60% based on property value; 40% based on income wealth y
- Minimizes funding guarantees and caps
- Education "choice" options are directly funded by the state, not deducted from local school districts
Includes:
- Economically Disadvantaged Students
- Students with Disabilities
- Gift Students
- English Language Learners
- Transportation
Why the Fair School Funding Plan works:
- The actual cost of education defines the funding level that should be available to all students. It ends the practice of using the amount of money the legislature wanted to spend to define the base cost.
- The state makes a larger contribution towards education costs, reducing reliance on local property taxes. Property taxes fuel disparities in local funding.
- The plan establishes a more accurate and fair way to assess local capacity, providing greater relief to low-wealth communities.
- It ends deduction funding for charters and voucher programs. This required local school districts to spend their state funds on private school vouchers.
- It establishes higher funding levels for "categorical aid," funds for students with disabilities, English Language Learners, gifted, and children living in poverty.
NEXT STEPS: Fully Fund the Fair School Funding Plan
Fully Fund the Plan: The Legislature only funded one-third of the projected cost in the 134th General Assembly
Codify the Plan: The plan is not permanent law so it needs to be re-approved in each budget cycle
Update the Data: The cost analysis is based on data from 2018. It needs to be updated with current data
Fund the Cost Study: The legislature needs to fund a cost study for educational needs of children living in poverty in order to establish a more realistic level of DPIA aid for this group of students
Fully Fund the Plan: The Legislature only funded one-third of the projected cost in the 134th General Assembly
Codify the Plan: The plan is not permanent law so it needs to be re-approved in each budget cycle
Update the Data: The cost analysis is based on data from 2018. It needs to be updated with current data
Fund the Cost Study: The legislature needs to fund a cost study for educational needs of children living in poverty in order to establish a more realistic level of DPIA aid for this group of students