Find your next job fast at the Jan. 28 Virtual Career Fair. Register now.

Your Education Road Map

Politics K-12®

ESSA. Congress. State chiefs. School spending. Elections. Education Week reporters keep watch on education policy and politics in the nation’s capital and in the states.


Is a Title I Funding-Formula Fight on the Horizon?

By Alyson Klein — July 12, 2013 3 min read

If a rewrite of the No Child Left Behind Act goes to the floor of the House next week, look for a hot policy debate over ... funding formulas. (You thought I was gonna say common core, didn’t you? Well, probably that too.)

Advocates for rural schools, including the American Association of School Administrators and the Rural School and Community Trust, have long bemoaned the Title I funding formula, which they say shortchanges rural areas because it takes into account a district’s population, and not just concentrations of poverty. Great write-up by my former colleague David Hoff here.

Those groups have found a champion in U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., whose western Pennsylvania district loses out under the current formula. Thompson has teamed up with Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., to reintroduce the All Children are Equal Act, which seeks to refocus the formula to ensure that districts with high concentrations of poverty (and, perhaps, smaller populations) don’t lose out.

In an interview, Thompson pointed out that it’s not just rural districts that gain under his bill: The Cleveland Municipal School District would stand to rake in almost $6.5 million in extra Title I funding over the next four years if the legislation were enacted. This isn’t the first time the bill has been introduced, we wrote about the previous version here.

The measure would phase in the changes over four years, Thompson explained, so that districts that would ultimately see less funding wouldn’t get the rug pulled out from under them all at once. Everything you ever wanted to know about the bill, its purpose, and its supporters right here.

The legislation “is an equitable and fair solution that’s going to address a fundamental flaw in Title I,” Thompson said in an interview July 11. “Every child should be treated equally under the law. Poverty is poverty, no matter where a child resides.” The bill has the thumbs up from a number of rural and education groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation and the Parent Teacher Association.

Who is decidedly against this? The Council of the Great City Schools, for one. Jeff Simmering, the director of legislative services for the group, says the ACE act “just rips a huge amount of money from large urban districts” particularly in states like Maryland, Florida, and Georgia where school districts take up entire counties, as opposed to states (like Pennsylvania) with lots of smaller school districts.

“They are disproportionately hit,” he said. “We recognize that every formula is going to have some quirks ... but we think it’s a really bad idea.”

And, he said, the bill could really gum up the works when it comes to passing an Elementary and Secondary Education Act rewrite in general.

“You open up a Title I formula fight and that just complicates reauthorization,” he said. “It becomes all about the money and not about the policy.”

Despite its bipartisan pedigree, it’s unclear whether the measure will even make it past the House Rules Committee, which serves as a gatekeeper of sorts—the panel gets to decide which amendments actually get floor consideration. Formula funding amendments don’t have a great track record in Rules, an advocate told me this week.

And partisan politics could play a role too. Some inside baseball: Thompson actually introduced his bill as an amendment to the ESEA bill considered by the House education committee back in 2012. And it failed, in part because no Democrats voted for it (even the ones who were supporters of the bill). Democrats had essentially decided that they weren’t going to vote for any amendments because they disliked the underlying legislation so much.


This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
School & District Management Webinar
Branding Matters. Learn From the Pros Why and How
Learn directly from the pros why K-12 branding and marketing matters, and how to do it effectively.
Content provided by EdWeek Top School Jobs
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
School & District Management Webinar
How to Make Learning More Interactive From Anywhere
Join experts from Samsung and Boxlight to learn how to make learning more interactive from anywhere.
Content provided by Samsung
Teaching Live Online Discussion A Seat at the Table With Education Week: How Educators Can Respond to a Post-Truth Era
How do educators break through the noise of disinformation to teach lessons grounded in objective truth? Join to find out.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

BASE Program Site Director
Thornton, CO, US
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Director of Information Technology
Montpelier, Vermont
Washington Central UUSD
Great Oaks AmeriCorps Fellow August 2021 - June 2022
New York City, New York (US)
Great Oaks Charter Schools
Director of Athletics
Farmington, Connecticut
Farmington Public Schools

Read Next

Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: January 13, 2021
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Obituary In Memory of Michele Molnar, EdWeek Market Brief Writer and Editor
EdWeek Market Brief Associate Editor Michele Molnar, who was instrumental in launching the publication, succumbed to cancer.
5 min read
Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: December 9, 2020
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: Stories You May Have Missed
A collection of articles from the previous week that you may have missed.
8 min read