What Evidence-Based Funding is teaching us about school performance

For generations, Illinois had a school funding formula that was so flawed it created one of the most inequitable and inadequate education funding systems in America. It was based on a minimum, per-pupil amount of funding - known as the "Foundation Level" - that wasn't tied to any actual costs of educating students. Instead, lawmakers simply pegged the Foundation Level to an amount they thought the state could afford. Considering that Illinois' current deficit of around $10 billion is a continuation of annual deficits going back to at least 1991 (records aren't available for prior years) it should come as no surprise that what the state could afford was consistently and significantly less than adequate.

And because Illinois regularly underfunded education from state-based resources, the old system put enormous pressure on local revenue - read that as property taxes - to pay for schools. This, of course, was the main cause of inequity under the old system, as the quality of education a kid received was tied to the property wealth of the community in which she or he lived.

Illinois took a major step toward addressing the ills created under its old formula, when Gov. Rauner, despite his prior opposition, finally signed the Evidence Based Funding for Student Success Act, or EBF, into law. The EBF represents a significant improvement versus the old school funding regimen for three key reasons. First, unlike the prior system which ignored educational costs, the EBF directly ties funding to the cost of implementing educational practices which the research shows actually enhance student achievement.

In other words, the EBF funds what works. It does this by identifying a unique "Adequacy Target" of resources which each individual school district needs to implement the aforesaid educational best practices, based on the specific student population it serves, including total enrollment, as well as how many of its students are low-income, have special needs or are English learners. Next, the EBF divides districts into four Tiers based on resource levels, with Tier 1 districts being farthest from their Adequacy Targets and hence slated for priority in new funding.

Finally, the EBF creates a level of transparency and accountability that was simply impossible to attain under the prior formula. On the local level, the EBF legislation spells out each of the evidence-based practices that enhance student achievement. This effectively creates a rubric for school districts to use when deciding how to allocate new funding received under the EBF. Better yet, it allows stakeholders to review whether their local school district is applying new resources to evidence-based practices - or not.

At the state level, the EBF shows how inequitable gaps in funding actually correlate to gaps in performance by income, race, and ethnicity. For instance, in FY2018, 707, or almost 83 percent, of the state's 853 school districts faced an Adequacy Gap, that is, had less funding than what the evidence indicates they needed. Fully 315 qualified for "Tier 1" status - meaning they were among the furthest from having the resources needed to hit their Adequacy Targets. On average, these Tier 1 districts had $5,402 less per pupil than what the evidence indicated they needed to educate the students they served. They also had the lowest average performance on standardized tests. Contrast that to the resources and performance of the 146 Tier 4 districts, which in FY2018 on average had $3,775 more in per pupil resources than the minimum required by the evidence - and also happened to be the highest performing.

Similarly, the average Adequacy Gap faced by students in districts spending below their respective adequacy targets was $1,347 per pupil, or 41 percent worse, for black students, and $1,564 or 47 percent worse for Latino students, than it was for white students. And those adequacy gaps also happen to correlate with achievement gaps by race and ethnicity in Illinois. So now we know: Illinois' old school funding system inequitably denied resources to schools serving low-income kids generally and minority kids specifically. We also know that resource inequity correlated with achievement gaps. Which is knowledge that should compel decision-makers to change the status quo - by providing all schools the resources the evidence indicates is needed for every child to succeed academically.

Ralph Martire, rmartire@ctbaonline.org, is executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, a bipartisan fiscal policy think tank.