Gateway to Think Tanks
来源类型 | REPORT |
规范类型 | 报告 |
Bitter Pill, Better Formula | |
Raegen Miller; Cynthia G. Brown | |
发表日期 | 2010-02-03 |
出版年 | 2010 |
语种 | 英语 |
概述 | Raegen Miller and Cynthia Brown outline changes toward a single, fair, and equitable formula for disbursing funds to high-poverty schools. |
摘要 | Read the full report (pdf) Download the executive summary (pdf) Interactive Graphic: Title I Education Spending Federal policymakers and education officials, aware of the potential ferocity of a “formula fight,” tread with care when it comes to revising the way Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act distributes funds. But the formulas driving Title I-A grants require a major overhaul because, in short, they favor wealthy states and enormous school districts. Many schools serving high concentrations of poor students are being shortchanged. Previous efforts to improve the targeting of Title I-A funds to school districts serving children in concentrated poverty, the program’s intent, have quadrupled the number of formulas involved, yielding only marginal improvements. There are formidable political barriers to reform, but the sheer complexity of the formulas poses an additional barrier. It is easy for policymakers to overlook inequity when it is shrouded in the fog of four funding formulas. A recent paper, “Secret Recipes Revealed,” demystified the formulas driving Title I-A grants, setting the stage for the three goals of this paper:
The framework for the proposed formula has three dimensions, each conceptually grounded in current policy but operationalized here in a refined way:
The proposed formula adopts the eligibility criteria of the most modern of the four Title I-A formulas. Eligible districts under these criteria must serve at least 10 poor children also representing at least 5 percent of all children served in the district. An authorized amount for each district equals the product of four factors:
Ratable reduction procedures, conceptually the same as halving a recipe, rescale authorized amounts based on actual appropriations, and inherited hold-harmless procedures are implemented to protect districts from precipitous drops in funding for reasons beyond their control. Similarly, a growth ceiling prevents districts’ allocations from increasing at imprudently fast rates. Substantial funding increases would moderate discomfort created by a switch to the proposed formula. The 2010 fiscal year appropriations for Title I-A provide no such increase. Under level funding with the proposed formula, sparsely populated states would see substantial drops in funding rates, and most western and southern states would see increases. Yet the largest districts within states would tend to lose more or gain less than their smaller counterparts. The proposed formula could be made more palatable to those standing to lose in a number of ways, but the proposed formula should serve to stimulate a lively debate and responsible exploration of a way to fund Title I-A more fairly. Read the full report (pdf) Download the executive summary (pdf) Interactive Graphic: Title I Education Spending |
主题 | Education, K-12 |
URL | https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2010/02/03/7294/bitter-pill-better-formula/ |
来源智库 | Center for American Progress (United States) |
资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/434749 |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Raegen Miller,Cynthia G. Brown. Bitter Pill, Better Formula. 2010. |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。