The Charleston County School District may change the way it allocates funds to schools.
At a school board meeting on March 11, Superintendent Anita Huggins recommended implementing a new budgeting method for the upcoming fiscal year. The method is a weighted student funding formula designed to provide resources to schools based on individual student needs and student demographics.
The school district currently funds schools based on student enrollment. The weighted student-based formula proposed by Huggins would consider a new ratio where pupils in poverty, multilingual students and students with disabilities would be weighted higher than students who do not fit these categories.
This would result in increased funds to schools, which, as Huggins’ team explained, would benefit all scholars in attendance.
“I want to make sure the public understands that this isn't taking from one school to give to another, but instead it's a way to support all kids across the system,” Huggins said.
Michelle Simmons, CCSD’s chief academic officer, said that transitioning to a weighted student-based formula would sustain the academic gains that the district has seen over the last couple of years with ESSER-funded programs. This model would also increase school autonomy.
“This new funding formula will give schools and principals the ability to shore up their programs where they believe they need the most resources,” she said.
The new ratios proposed by Huggins were 3 to 1 for elementary schools, 4 to 1 for middle schools, and 6 to 1 for high schools. Simmons explained that, in practice, this would mean that for every three, four or six students that fit the three categories laid out, an additional student would be added.
The funding model would cost the district $30.2 million, 12 percent of the $250 million received through ESSER funds. If approved, the district plans to sustain the weighted student funding model for the next few years.
A growing trend
Weighted student funding models are being implemented by school districts across the nation such as Denver, Chicago, and even Charlotte-Mecklenburg in North Carolina. No other district in South Carolina has shifted to weighted student funding, making CCSD the first district in the state to implement it if it gets approved by the school board.
Although research on the effectiveness of weighted student funding is limited, scholars and education experts have begun to document ways districts nationwide are shifting to this model and its impact on student outcomes.
Studies show that districts can freely decide which categories of students they will account for in their formulas. Therefore, there is no such thing as a standard way of implementing the model.
A study conducted by the Edunomics Lab, an education research center at Georgetown University, suggested that districts tailor this model to reflect their own spending history and local context.
Research indicates that if districts decide to shift to this model, it’s because they have identified a need for more equity, autonomy and flexibility.
Marguerite Roza, director of the Edunomics Lab, said that this model better suits districts that have been under pressure regarding transparency on how they allocate their funds.
Under weighted student funding, principals become the financial leaders of their schools. They have discretion over the funds allocated to their schools and use them to best serve their students.
Advocates said it allows principals to use funds in ways that better meet their students’ needs, as well as involve parents and teachers, who most times are left out in this process. Yet, Edunomics found most of them have not received formal financial training or certifications, which would help them to better serve the role of financial leaders of their schools.
Roza said that over time, principals are responsive to their schools’ issues.
“I think some of the districts are worried (principals) don't have the skills to do this. And it is one of those things that you learn as you have to do it. You learn that financial stuff as you do it,” she said.
Experts added that there are limits on how principals can use funds. Eric Hanushek, an education economist at Stanford University, said that principals don’t have control over teachers’ salaries since these are determined by school districts.
Another common criticism of the model is that if enrollment rates drop, the schools would receive less funding and potentially close.
Roza said this was a misconception.
“(People) blame the formula, and they think there just would be a lot more money in the system if it weren't for the formula. And that's not necessarily true,” she said. “It's a formula. It doesn't decide the amount of money, it decides how to divvy it up.”
Guardrails and clear goals are keys to success
Experts said it’s imperative that districts place clear-cut boundaries around the ways principals decide to spend their funds.
“You can’t allow each individual school to act like a school district and go out and hire people, or decide how many to hire and so forth, without some guardrails on it,” Hanushek said.
This matter was discussed at the budget workshop meeting, with Huggins stating that she and her team are actively working on developing guardrails around the model.
“With this sort of system comes more transparency to the public, but also increased accountability,” she said. “We want to have some significant guardrails in place to make sure things don't go awry and that they don't go awry quickly.”
Roza, the director of the Edunomics Lab, said that ultimately a weighted student funding model can be a helpful, but not sufficient, strategy, and that although changing a funding formula is not a “quick fix,” districts that move toward this model do see improvements in terms of equity.
“I think that any model you implement, you have to implement it well, it has to be kind of consistent. People need to be trained and stay focused on the outcomes,” she said. “But a lot of the districts that implemented it, did it because they were under a lot of pressure to address inequities in their system.”
Roza explained that with a weighted student funding model, resources are delivered more deliberately and equitably across schools.
“So, where you might have had some schools that draw down more than their share of dollars, or some that got shortchanged, weighted student funding seems to eliminate that,” she said.
Roza highlighted that one of the keys to this model delivering results is keeping a clear goal in mind in terms of desired outcomes, whether that be increasing math or reading scores, or higher student attendance. This, combined with more equity and higher flexibility that the model brings, can increase the chances of driving improvements in terms of student outcomes.
