17
Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Page 2: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Fair School Funding: Core Principles

States should provide varying levels of funding to ensure equal educational opportunities to children with different needs.

A “progressive” finance system allocates more funding to districts with high levels of student poverty; a “regressive” system allocates less to those districts; and a “flat” system allocates roughly the same across districts with varying needs.

Page 3: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Sta

te &

Local R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Low Poverty High Poverty

State A (Low revenue, poverty “flat”)

State B (Avg. implicit base rev., highly regressive)

State C (Avg. implicit base rev., progressive)

Page 4: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Southwest

0% Poverty 10% Poverty

20% Poverty

30% Poverty

$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Arizona

Colorado

Nevada

New Mex-ico

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Loca

l R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Page 5: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Mid-Atlantic

0% Poverty 10% Poverty

20% Poverty

30% Poverty

$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Delaware

Maryland

New Jersey

New York

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Local R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Page 6: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Gulf Coast

0% Poverty 10% Poverty

20% Poverty

30% Poverty

$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Alabama

Louisiana

Mis-sis-sippi

Texas

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Loca

l R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Page 7: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Pacific

0% Poverty 10% Poverty

20% Poverty

30% Poverty

$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

California

Oregon

Washing-ton

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Loca

l R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Page 8: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

North Central

0% Poverty 10% Poverty

20% Poverty

30% Poverty

$5,000

$7,000

$9,000

$11,000

$13,000

$15,000

$17,000

$19,000

$21,000

Illinois

Iowa

Min-nesota

Wis-consin

Census Poverty Rate

Sta

te &

Loca

l R

even

ue p

er

Pu

pil

Page 9: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Funding Level

StatePredicted State &

Local Revenue Rank

Wyoming $19,520 1Alaska $17,967 2New York $17,375 3New Jersey $16,817 4Connecticut $15,693 5Arizona $7,899 47Idaho $7,509 48Oklahoma $7,449 49Utah $7,379 50Tennessee $7,306 51

Page 10: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

State Funding DistributionState

At 0% Poverty

At 30% Poverty High/Low Grade

Utah $5,772 $9,157 159% ANew Jersey $13,961 $19,805 142% AOhio $8,993 $12,301 137% AMinnesota $10,026 $13,043 130% BMassachusetts $12,598 $15,550 123% BNorth Dakota $10,774 $8,577 80% FNorth Carolina $11,111 $8,699 78% FNew Hampshire $13,958 $10,849 78% FIllinois $11,312 $8,707 77% FNevada $10,561 $7,974 76% F

Page 11: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Funding Effort

StatePer capita

GDP Effort Index Grade

Vermont $36,789 0.057 ANew Jersey $49,840 0.050 ANew York $49,976 0.049 ANew Hampshire $40,566 0.045 AIndiana $36,168 0.045 AArizona $35,000 0.030 FTennessee $34,828 0.030 FNorth Dakota $44,970 0.029 FSouth Dakota $44,261 0.026 FDelaware $61,248 0.025 F

Page 12: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Does Fair Funding Mean Better Student Outcomes?

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

A B C D F

Fairness Index Grade

NA

EP

Pro

fici

ency

200

7

Page 13: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

What Happens When States Make Smart and Equitable Investments?

New Jersey Math Achievement Trends 4th Grade NAEP

White, 248

Hispanic, 206

Hispanic, 224

Black, 204

Black, 217

Black, 232

National Ave., 222

National Ave., 226

National Ave., 239White, 236 White, 239

White, 255

Hispanic, 234

Hispanic, 204

Black, 198

National Ave., 219

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

1992  1996  2003   2007  

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP Data Trends

NA

EP

Scale

Score

CA, 230

Page 14: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

What Happens When States Make Smart and Equitable Investments?

New Jersey Math Achievement Trends 4th Grade NAEP

White, 248

Hispanic, 206

Hispanic, 224

Black, 204

Black, 217

Black, 232

National Ave., 222

National Ave., 226

National Ave., 239White, 236 White, 239

White, 255

Hispanic, 234

Hispanic, 204

Black, 198

National Ave., 219

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

1992  1996  2003   2007  

Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP Data Trends

NA

EP

Scale

Score

CA, 230

Page 15: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

State Pre-K Enrollment

Source: The State of Preschool 2011, The National Institute for Early Education Research

Page 16: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Poverty: What Can We Do?

Fair School Funding: Essential precondition to improving high need schools and boosting achievement

Key to teacher quality/equity; supplemental programs for at-risk, ELL students

State school finance reform: “Deep Resistance”

Federal Policies: subsidize state finance inequity; use federal funds to leverage states to improve funding fairness

Page 17: Percent of Students in Districts with Census Poverty Rate over 20%

Poverty: What Can We Do?

Access to high quality Pre-K for every low income child, and every child in a low income community

State Pre-K Systems: unify Head Start, Child Care and Public School Pre-K

Right to attend school in safe and educationally adequate facilities

State capital program – assess need, ensure financing