A Quick Glance at School Finance:
A 50 State Survey of School Finance Policies
This compendium provides state-by-state descriptions of public elementary and secondary finance policies and programs in effect during the 2006-07 school year. The report consists of two volumes. In Volume I are state-by-state descriptions across all school finance components for each state. Volume II contains separate sections for select provisions across all states, including finance formulae and cost differentials for students and districts. Tax and expenditure information is also included in this part along with 50-state data on average per pupil funding, teacher’s salaries and percentage shares of total funds, drawn from Estimates and Ranking of Education Statistics (NEA, 2007).
The information contained in this report is based on surveys that were completed by each State Department of Education in response to a request for descriptions of school finance programs and provisions. Thus, all information in these two volumes has been provided by the chief state superintendent or finance officer for each state, or their designee, with the exception of four states. In these states, university professors or agency personnel provided the information. Once information was compiled from each state, it was posted on the internet for verification and correction by each State Department of Education.
Deborah A. Verstegen, Professor
University of Nevada, Reno
Teresa S. Jordan, Professor
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Paul Amador, Graduate Assistant
University of Nevada, Reno
Volume I: State-by-State Descriptions
| A Quick Glance at School Finance- Volume I |
Individual State Profiles:
All files are Adobe PDF
Volume II: Finance Formulae and Cost Differentials
| A Quick Glance at School Finance- Volume II |
Categorical Information:
| Description of the Formula |
| Capital Outlay and/or Debt Service |
| Transportation |
| Special Education |
| Compensatory Education |
| English Language Learner / Bilingual Education |
| Appendix |
Note: The authors wish to thank the College of Education, UNR, for a scholarly activities grant that supported this work. We are also grateful to state officials for the information contained in this report, and professors or agency personnel who filled the gaps. Finally, we wish to acknowledge Christine Promin, graduate assistant, UNLV, for her effort in formatting and editing the survey