RALEIGH — Does North Carolina’s method of funding public schools favor wealthy counties at the expense of poor ones? The facts suggest otherwise. To illustrate differences in per pupil appropriations, I will outline state, federal, and local funding for three fictional students — Alvin, Simon, and Theodore — who attend elementary schools in different counties in North Carolina.
According to the N.C. Department of Public Instruction, school districts received a base state appropriation of $5,511 per elementary school student for the 2008-09 school year. This appropriation included funds for Alvin, Simon, and Theodore’s teachers, teacher assistants, administrators, instructional resources, and transportation. Yet, this amount does not take into account additional funds earmarked for students facing challenging circumstances.
Alvin (+$5,511) is a disadvantaged student (+$235) who comes from a low-income family (+$356) and lives in a low-wealth county (+$268). He has an Individualized Education Program (+$3,501) for his Attention Deficit Disorder, which, unfortunately led to a poor performance on the state end-of-grade exam (+$164), even after the retest. Given these circumstances, state funding for Alvin would total $10,035. Alvin’s situation makes his school district eligible for an additional $3,820 in federal dollars. Thus, there is approximately $13,855 in state and federal funds available to assist struggling Alvin.
Unlike Alvin, Simon (+$5,511) is an intellectually and academically gifted child (+$423) who performs at or above grade level on the state end-of-grade exam. Simon comes from a middle-class family and attends an elementary school in a large, suburban county. Based on these circumstances, state funding for Simon would total approximately $5,934. Moreover, Simon’s school district would receive only $47 in federal funds. In the end, Simon’s school district would receive approximately $5,981 in state and federal funds for his education, half of what the state and federal government provide for Alvin’s schooling.
Like Alvin, Theodore (+$5,511) is a disadvantaged student (+$235) from a low-income family (+$356) who lives in a low-wealth county (+$268). He has an Individualized Education Program (+3,501) due to an emotional handicap, namely hoarding. Alvin also did not perform at grade level on the state end-of-grade exam (+$164). Unlike Alvin or Simon, Theodore also lives in a small county (+$629) and — given that Chipmunkian is his native language — has limited English proficiency (+$756). Theodore’s school district would receive $11,420 in state funds. Theodore’s circumstances make his school district eligible for an additional $5,777 in federal dollars. Thus, Theodore’s school district would receive approximately $17,197 in state and federal funds, almost three times the amount received by Simon’s school district.
Nearly 75 percent of the total per pupil expenditure comes from state and federal funds. Localities provide the remaining 25 percent. Local funding varies based on the tax base of the county. Typically, wealthier counties appropriate more per-pupil funding than poorer ones. For example, one of the wealthiest counties in North Carolina adds approximately $5,000 per pupil in local funds, while one of the poorest school districts adds slightly more than $1,000 per pupil.
Simon’s suburban school district would likely receive a larger appropriation from his county than Alvin’s and Theodore’s school districts would receive from their low-wealth counties. Nevertheless, it is clear that state and federal funding more than make up the difference. Even if Simon’s large, suburban county can contribute $5,000 to his education, Alvin and Theodore’s disadvantaged school district would still have a higher per pupil expenditure, thanks to generous state and federal appropriations.
Public school advocacy groups complain that local funding inequities hinder academic progress in poor counties. These special interest groups ignore the fact that state and federal funds offset local inequalities. These groups do not let the facts get in the way of their desire for more taxpayer money.
Terry Stoops is education policy analyst at the John Locke Foundation.