1

Funding Education in IllinoisChicago Town Hall Meeting

Senator Steans, Representative Cassidy & Alderman OstermanMarch 30, 2016

State Senator Andy Manar

Savage Inequalities, Jonathan Kozol, 1991

2

Perc

ent o

f tot

al fu

ndin

g

LocalStateFederal

1. Includes special education. Note: Categoricals include some competitive grants. Additional competitive grants represent very small portion of total spend. 2. Illinois distributes an additional $3.5 billion in federal funds to support state and local education. (source: Illinois State Board of Education Budget Book).3. Source: Illinois State Board of Education; ILearn website, APA report to EFAC

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

63% 63% 65%44%

31% 29% 25%43%

6% 8% 10% 13%

Illinois’s districts rely more heavily on local property taxes than other states

ARTICLE X ILLINOIS CONSTITUTIONSECTION 1. GOAL - FREE SCHOOLS. A fundamental goal of the People of the State is the educational development of all persons to the limits of their capacities. The State shall provide for an efficient system of high quality public educational institutions and services. Education in public schools through the secondary level shall be free. There may be such other free education as the General Assembly provides by law. The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

What we get for $12 billion

Property Tax Bill

38%

62%

District Revenues by Source: State vs. Local

State Sources Local Sources

Source: Ed Trust

3

Many districts in Illinois couldn’t tax themselves into

equity—even if they wanted to

What we get for $12 billion

Per Pupil Spending (PPS) varies in Illinois greatly:

Highest Spending District:Rondount Dist. 72 = $30,628

Lowest Spending District:Germantown Dist. 60 = $6,037

4

Only 44% of State education spending is distributed using some measurement of need.

The lottery provides approximately 6% of the State funds budgeted each year for schools—an important 6%

What we get for $12 billion

5

We own the most regressive funding system in the country.

OH MN SD DE TN IN KY CA MA LA NJ GA OK UT WI OR WV MS WA CT AR FL NM ND VT SC KS CO VA AZ AL NH NE ME WY RI ID MO MT IA NC MI MD TX PA NY IL-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Funding gaps between the highest and lowest poverty districts by state

Reading this figure: In Ohio, the highest poverty districts receive 22 percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest poverty districts (not adjusted for additional needs of low-income students). In states shaded in green,the highest poverty districts receive at least 5 percent more in state and local funds per student than the lowest poverty districts; in states shaded in red, they receive at least 5 percent less.Grey shading indicates similar levels of funding for the highest and lowest poverty districts.

Note: Hawaii was excluded from the within-state analysis because it is one district. Alaska and Nevada are also excluded because their student populations are heavily concentrated in certain districts and could not be broken into quartiles. Because so many of New York’s students are concentrated in New York City, we sorted that state into two halves, as opposed to four quartiles.

Spending money inequitably fails to improve state performance, meaning all students lose.

What we get for $12 billion

6

How Illinois fits its desired budget into its actual budget

that lacks adequate resources

What we get for $12 billion

7

We own some of the largest income-achievement gaps in the country

Source: NAEP 2013.

4th Grade Reading 8th Grade Math0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

52% 52%

16% 18%

Non-Low-Income Low-Income

Perc

ent a

t or a

bove

pro

ficie

nt

National Gap Rank:

47thNational Gap Rank:

48th

36 per-

centage point gap

34per-

centage point gap

Low-income achievement gap: students at or above proficient, 2013 NAEP.

What we get for $12 billion

8

Average state and local revenues per studentby enrollment of students of color

$10,842

$12,631 $13,481 $12,882

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

Districts Serving theMost Students of

Color

Quartile 2 Quartile 3 Districts Serving theFewest Students of

Color

Districts serving the most students of color in Illinois

receive roughly $2,000, or 16%, less in state and local funding

per student than districts serving the fewest

What we get for $12 billion

Illinois race-based achievement gaps, NAEP, 2013

Source: NAEP, 2013. Advance Illinois Analysis.

White Black Latino0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

46

1418

4th Grade Reading

Perc

ent o

f 4th

gra

ders

54%

35% 32

%

54%

35% 32

%

54%

35% 32

%

54%

35% 32

%

32 per-

centage point

gap

26 per-

centage point

gap

White Black Latino0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

48

12

22

8th Grade Math

Perc

ent o

f 4th

gra

ders

35%32%

35%32%

36 percent-

age point gap26 percent-

age point gap

We own some of the worst race-based

achievement gaps in the Nation.

9

What we get for $12 billion

• Enrollment: 1,473

• 54.9% low income

• 19.5% students w/ disabilities

• Per Pupil Spending (all sources): $7,479• Note: This represents -7.5% or $562 below adequacy and

-41% or $5,000 below the state avg. (est.)

• Total Annual State support: $5,700,000To be spending at an adequate level based on North Mac’s student need, total spending should increase by $562 per student (+7.5%). Filling that gap totaling approximately $800,000 would bring state support to $6,500,000.

North Mac School District #34

10

What we get for $12 billion

• Enrollment: 2,784

• 74% low income

• 18.5% English learners

• 8% students w/ disabilities

• Per Pupil Spending (all sources): $11,076

• Total Annual State support: $9,600,000

The East Moline School District can only afford to spend at a level that is $1,445 less than the state average of $12,521 Per Pupil. In addition, the district relies on state funding for 34% of its revenue, 8% higher than the state average of 26%.

East Moline School District #37

11

Conclusions

• In public education, funding isn’t the only thing that drives student success; but funding certainly does matter.

• Adequacy vs. Equity: The quantity of funding isn’t the only answer to fixing our problem; funding equity will help fix our problem as well. .

• Our system in inequitable for students and taxpayers alike.• According to the Education Trust, Illinois has some of the largest funding

gaps in the country, both between the highest and lowest poverty districts, and between districts serving the most and the fewest students of color.

• Our State budget doesn’t prioritize education which drives up property taxes. The Illinois budget contributes one of the smallest shares of school district revenue in the nation. But there are other states that contribute similar shares of district funds and have more equitable funding patterns. How much money the state contributes matters, but how it distributes those dollars matters, too.

• This is a fixable problem.

12

• Funding Illinois Future CoalitionFundingILFuture.orgTwitter: @FundingILFuture

• State Senator Andy Manar’s OfficeTwitter: @AndyManarFacebook: Senator Andy Manar

• Illinois School Report CardIllinoisReportCard.com

• Education TrustEdTrust.orgTwitter: @EdTrust

Resources