Search

This study examines charter school funding equity in 18 cities using 2019-20 data, the most recent available. The study uses official school district and state budget documents to capture every dollar flowing to schools, including in-kind services. The study answers the following questions: (1) What is the difference in per-pupil revenue between traditional public schools (TPS) and charter schools in major US cities in the 2019-20 school year? (2) Do differences in student demographics explain any funding differences between TPS and charter schools? (3) Does the relationship between TPS and charter school funding vary across categories of school revenue? and (4) Which cities are driving the results? Findings reveal that: (1) Charter school students across 18 cities receive an average of 30 percent less funding per pupil than students in TPS in 17 of those cities; (2) About 65 percent of the underfunding of public charter schools in the cities can be attributed to lower enrollments of students with disabilities in the charter sector; and (3) Charter schools receive less local funding, state funding, federal funding, and nonpublic funding than TPS.

Each year, the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV) provides a tuition and fees report based on charges approved by boards of visitors at Virginia public institutions. The report includes a list of tuition and fee charges to in-state and out-of-state students and for undergraduate and graduate programs. It also provides trends over time and comparisons to other states and highlights affordable options students can choose to reduce costs. This report focuses on tuition and fees for in-state undergraduates and provides a summary of the following four items: (1) tuition and fees for the 2023-24 academic year; (2) state funding and tuition and fee trends; (3) tuition and fee comparisons to other states; and (4) pathways to increase affordability beyond tuition and fees. The appendices compare changes in tuition and fees for in-state undergraduate, out-of-state undergraduate, in-state graduate, out-of-state graduate, in-state first professional, and out-of-state first professional students. [For "2022-23 Tuition and Fees at Virginia State-Supported Colleges and Universities," see ED624424.]

Food insecurity is widespread among college students in the United States. Food benefits delivered through the CalFresh program, California's version of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), can reduce hunger by helping students pay for groceries, but may not reach all eligible students. To date, higher education systems have lacked good estimates of the share of their students who are eligible for CalFresh and the share who actually receive benefits. To address this information gap, the California Policy Lab (CPL) partnered with the California Community College (CCC) Chancellor's Office, the University of California Office of the President (UCOP), the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), and the California Student Aid Commission (CSAC) to build a linked database of student-level administrative data on college enrollment, financial aid, and CalFresh participation. This database covers all students enrolled at CCC or UC campuses from academic years 2010-11 through 2021-22, along with corresponding FAFSA submissions and CalFresh participation. Using these data, we are able to measure how many college students are likely eligible for CalFresh, and of those how many participate. CalFresh eligibility does not perfectly overlap with student need. Some students who are food insecure may not be eligible for benefits, while some eligible students may not be in great need. This in part reflects the rules of the program, which are designed to capture need but do not always do so perfectly. We attempt to measure eligibility according to the actual rules. Our estimates complement other work that uses survey data to measure students' basic needs (California Community Colleges League, 2022). We estimate that in Fall 2019, on the eve of the COVID pandemic, 16% of California community college students (256,000 students), 31% of UC undergraduate students (69,000 students), and 6% of UC graduate students (3,000 students) were likely eligible for CalFresh benefits. However, the majority of these students did not receive benefits -- only 30% of eligible community college students, 22% of eligible UC undergraduates, and 29% of eligible UC graduate students were actually enrolled in CalFresh. We emphasize that our eligibility determinations are estimates based on information available in existing data, which imperfectly capture some elements of the CalFresh eligibility determination process. They may somewhat overstate or understate student eligibility. However, extensive investigation led us to conclude that the errors are likely not large and that our estimates are a good approximation of the share of students who would be found eligible under individualized determinations. As we discuss below, the higher eligibility rate among UC undergraduates as compared to CCC students reflects program rules that make it easier for UC students to qualify than for CCC students with similar resources. We also find differences in eligibility across groups of students within each segment, reflecting both variation in need and program rules. Among both CCC and UC students, Black and Hispanic students, for example, are more likely to be eligible than are White or Asian American students, and students receiving federal, state, or institutional financial aid are much more likely to be eligible than are students not receiving aid. Benefits receipt generally mirrors this, although there are differences across groups in the share of eligible students who receive benefits. The take-up rate, which is the share of eligible students who participate in CalFresh, is higher for Black students (and, at the UC but not at CCCs, Hispanic students) than for White students, and for students on financial aid than for students who are not. Our report indicates there is much room to improve CalFresh participation among eligible students. Through detailed analyses of the paths to eligibility and of variation in participation rates, we hope to shed light on opportunities for policymakers, higher education administrators, community-based organizations, student groups, and advocates to better connect eligible students to benefits. [Additional support was provided by the Woven Foundation.]

We propose a new method for estimating school-level characteristics from publicly available census data. We use a school's location to impute its catchment area by aggregating the nearest "n" census block groups such that the number of school-aged children in those "n" block groups is just over the number of students enrolled in that school. We then weight census data by the number of school-aged children in the block-group to estimate school-level measures. We conduct several robustness checks to assess the quality of our estimates and find that our method is broadly successful in replicating known school-level characteristics and producing unbiased estimates for school-level income. This method expands the available set of school-level variables to the broader and richer set of characteristics measured in the census, which can then be used to conduct descriptive and observational research across a long time horizon.

"The Appalachian Region: A Data Overview from the 2017-2021 American Community Survey," also known as "The Chartbook," draws from the most recent American Community Survey and comparable Census Population Estimates. The report contains over 300,000 data points about Appalachia's economy, income, employment, education, and other important indicators--all presented at regional, subregional, state, and county levels. Though that data was collected before, and during the initial ten months of, the COVID-19 pandemic, they provide a critical benchmark for comparison when more pandemic and post-pandemic information becomes available. [For the 2016-2020 Chartbook, see ED625962.]

Virtual charter schools are increasingly popular, yet there is no research on the long-term outcomes of virtual charter students. We link statewide education records from Oregon with earnings information from IRS records housed at the U.S. Census Bureau to provide evidence on how virtual charter students fare as young adults. Virtual charter students have substantially worse high school graduation rates, college enrollment rates, bachelor's degree attainment, employment rates, and earnings than students in traditional public schools. Although there is growing demand for virtual charter schools, our results suggest that students who enroll in virtual charters may face negative long-term consequences.

Trellis' Student Financial Wellness Survey (SFWS) seeks to document the financial well-being of post-secondary students and provide institutions with a detailed profile of the financial issues their students face, some of which could potentially impact their success in college. This report details aggregated findings for the 89 colleges and universities across the country that participated in the fall 2022 implementation of the survey. [For "Student Financial Wellness Survey: Fall 2021 Semester Results. National Aggregate Report," see ED625724.]

This set of tables introduces new data for national and state-level public elementary and secondary revenues and expenditures for fiscal year (FY) 2021. Specifically, these tables include the following school finance data: (1) revenue and expenditure totals; (2) revenues by source; (3) expenditures by function and object; (4) current expenditures; (5) revenues and current expenditures per pupil; (6) expenditures from Title I funds; and (7) revenues and expenditures from COVID-19 Federal Assistance Funds. The tables chosen for this report demonstrate the range of information available when using the National Public Education Financial Survey (NPEFS). [For "Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: FY 20. Finance Tables. NCES 2022-301," see ED619372.]

For more than 37 years, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU) has advocated on behalf of Hispanic higher education in the U.S. and around the world. The mission of the association is to Champion Hispanic Success in Higher Education. HACU fulfills its mission by: promoting the development of member colleges and universities; improving access to and the quality of postsecondary educational opportunities for Hispanic students; and meeting the needs of business, industry and government through the development and sharing of resources, information and expertise. The Annual Report highlights advocacy efforts, HACU's membership, conferences and events, financials, leadership programs, student services and activities supported by HACU's staff at its National Headquarters in San Antonio, Texas and regional offices in Washington, D.C. and Sacramento, California. [For the 2021 report, see ED620469.]

School funding in Michigan is inadequate and inequitable. Michigan does not provide a sufficient base per-pupil amount, nor does the state properly address the cost of educating students with additional needs, especially students with disabilities, English learners, and low-income students. It would cost $4.5 billion to bring districts to funding adequacy based on estimates updated from the 2018 Michigan School Finance Research Collaborative (SFRC) adequacy study. This cost includes an estimated $1.6 billion to introduce universal, no-cost preschool. This report emphasizes the importance of the SFRC's adequacy recommendations by highlighting the following current needs and potential benefits from the SFRC adequacy study: (1) Most Michigan districts need substantial increases in revenue to reach adequate funding; and (2) Certain districts, especially those serving significant numbers of low-income students, are more severely under-resourced.

Community colleges in the United States, which serve a disproportionate number of students from low-income backgrounds, can provide a valuable pathway toward well-paying careers. However, graduation rates at community colleges are very low--among first-time, full-time, degree-seeking students who enter public two-year schools, only 29 percent graduate within three years. Seeking to address this challenge, three community colleges in Ohio implemented a new comprehensive program model that was based closely on the City University of New York's (CUNY's) proven Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). In 2015, the three Ohio colleges began implementing their programs and experienced similar successes as CUNY; the first phase of MDRC's study found large impacts on graduation rates and transfer to four-year institutions after three years. This brief extends the follow-up period for the Ohio programs to six years and provides earnings and employment impacts for the first time. After six years, the program continued to have an impact on graduation: 44 percent of students in the program group earned a degree, compared with 29 percent in the control group. Notably, these improvements in academic achievement have led to increased earnings, on average, for the students in the program group. In Year 6, students in the program group earned an additional $1,948 over the control group average of $17,626, an increase of 11 percent. These findings represent a new and important contribution to the growing body of evidence on comprehensive approaches (especially those modeled after CUNY ASAP) to improve the educational--and now economic--outcomes of students from low-income backgrounds. Future briefs will extend the follow-up period for academic outcomes to eight years and labor market outcomes to ten years. [For the supplement to this report, see ED627556.]

School finance debates frequently turn on two crucial questions: (1) How much do state and local governments spend on K-12 education?; and (2) How are education dollars distributed across jurisdictions? This focus makes sense because the answers to these questions determine how well states are able to provide an adequate, equal education for all students. This report, however, focuses on two different questions: (1) Where do school revenues come from?; and (2) How does revenue composition affect education policymaking? Put differently, this report focuses on the degree to which states rely on state versus local revenue, or on different types of taxes (e.g., those on income, sales, or property), and how such features matter for the adequacy and equity of education spending. Two states with identical finance systems and student populations, and which spend the same amount overall on K-12 schools, might have very different adequacy and equity outcomes depending on the composition of their revenue. In short, money matters; but where money comes from matters too.

The data presented in this report provide facts about the extent to which local, state, and national governments commit resources to public education. As one might expect in a nation as diverse as the United States--with respect to economics, geography, and politics--the level of commitment to education varies on a state-by-state basis. Thus, NEA Research offers this report to its state and local affiliates as well as to researchers, policymakers, and the public as a tool to examine public education programs and services. Part I of this report--Rankings 2022--provides state-level data on an array of topics relevant to the complex enterprise of public education. Part II of this report--Estimates 2023--is in its 78th year of production. Estimates provides data tables projecting public school enrollment, employment and compensation of personnel, and finances, as reported by individual state departments of education. The influx of federal funding through COVID relief measures added a new layer of complexity to the development of financial projections. Part III of this report--National Trends 2014-23--presents summary data of national trends in student enrollment and attendance, staff salaries, sources of school funding, and levels of educational expenditures in the previous 10 years. [For "Rankings of the States 2021 and Estimates of School Statistics 2022. NEA Research," see ED620624.]

Increasing education funding is a topic of discussion every year at the Minnesota State Legislature. In January, Governor Tim Walz proposed a 4% increase to the basic education formula allowance within the K-12 general education revenue program, the "education formula" that determines the majority of funding school districts receive from the state. Whenever any changes to the general education revenue program are proposed, it brings up an ongoing question--will some districts benefit more than others? To help with this transparency issue, this report examines how an increase to one component of the general education revenue program--the basic education revenue formula allowance--would impact districts across the state, and in doing so, hopefully provides some insight into how the general education revenue program works.

Women represent a key demographic in the global workforce and are increasingly seeking advanced degrees to further their careers. However, many barriers and challenges still exist in attracting and retaining prospective female students in graduate management education (GME) programs. This research brief takes a closer look at the perspectives of women in the GME pipeline. Data is leveraged from GMAC's Prospective Students Survey, in which candidates self-select their gender identity, as well as other research to better understand their motivations and goals. With this understanding, GME programs can better tailor messaging to use when marketing to this key audience. First, the brief examines the mindset female candidates have expressed in the survey, including the motivations and barriers they consider when assessing a potential next step in GME. Then, through the identification of female candidates' hopes for potential benefits from GME, the second section contextualizes these preferences. With a better understanding of female GME candidates' mindsets and hopes, the final section examines their associated career goals and expectations and their plans for the future.

The paper presents a first global investigation of the longer-term inequality implications of COVID-19 by examining the effect of school closures on the ability of children from different countries and backgrounds to engage in continued learning throughout the pandemic, and their implications for intergenerational mobility in education. The analysis builds on the data from the Global Database of Intergenerational Mobility, country-specific results of the learning loss simulation model using weekly school closure information from February 2020 to February 2022, and high-frequency phone survey data collected by the World Bank during the pandemic to assess the incidence and quality of continued learning during periods of school closures across children from different backgrounds. Based on this information, the paper simulates counterfactual levels of educational attainment and corresponding absolute and relative intergenerational educational mobility measures with and without COVID-19 impacts, to arrive at estimates of COVID-19 impacts. The simulations suggest that the extensive school closures and associated learning losses are likely to have a significant impact on both absolute and relative intergenerational educational mobility in the absence of remedial measures. In upper-middle-income countries, the share of children with more years of education than their parents (absolute mobility) could decline by 8 percentage points, with the largest impacts observed in the Latin America region. Furthermore, unequal access to continued learning during school closures across children from households of different socioeconomic backgrounds (proxied by parental education levels) leads to a significant decline in relative educational mobility. [This report was prepared by the World Bank Poverty and Equity Global Practice & Education Global Practice.]

Across the United States, students attending rural school districts can face different obstacles than their urban counterparts, particularly rural students from households living below the federal poverty level. But how rural districts are defined can vary by federal, state, and local entity and can sometimes not capture the difficulties specific districts face. The authors examine the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) definitions of rurality--the predominant avenue of federal funding for rural districts--and compare these definitions with how states define "rural" in their own funding formulas. The authors show that these definitions often identify different districts, and they investigate how summary data on district demographics, staffing, revenues, and expenditures vary across these different definitions. Based on the findings in this report, the authors recommend the following: (1) States should consider incorporating a "small" school district component into support systems, either for the first time or in addition to other components; (2) States should reevaluate (or evaluate for the first time) which definitions determine eligibility for funding; and (3) Researchers should consider the geographic context of their research and which definitions of rurality are most appropriate. The pandemic has had significant consequences for rural students, who often lacked internet and other supports necessary to learn from home. It is crucial that policymakers understand how state and federal definitions of rurality affect their understanding of rural districts' needs and resources to support students who are often already at a disadvantage.

Crises have a way of shaking up the status quo and creating space for new thinking. When shocked out of their familiarity, people start to ask questions as to why things are the way that they are and brainstorm ways to make them better. Enter entrepreneurs. They are the people who take those ideas that are lying around and attempt to create solutions to the problems blasted open by crises. The pandemic was a crisis for American education. From 2019 to 2022 the average fourth grade math score dropped 5 scale score points, falling to the lowest level since 2005. In eighth grade, the average math score dropped 8 points, the lowest they have been since 2003. Entrepreneurs responded to the pandemic with gusto. The Prenda microschool network started in 2013 but tripled in size during the pandemic. Parents looking for smaller, more responsive education environments met a platform that was ready for them. The Art of Problem Solving, a content provider known originally for its high-level math courses, leaned into the pandemic, flooding their website with resources for parents and building out the functionality of their products. Now emerging from the pandemic, it is an opportune time to take stock of exactly where the world of educational entrepreneurship stands. What are the headwinds and what are the tailwinds? Where is entrepreneurship succeeding and where it is struggling? To answer these questions, EdChoice partnered with Hanover Research to survey 59 educational entrepreneurs working today to find out about their experiences. This paper shares the results of that survey.

The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and as many as a third of Americans have some type of criminal record. Upon reentry, individuals with a justice history, whom referred as returning citizens, face significant barriers to economic security and reintegration into their communities. Among the most formidable barriers to reentry are a disadvantaged living environment, low levels of education, mental health challenges, and stigma that excludes them from job opportunities and other resources. All of these factors contribute to a high recidivism rate among returning citizens and make it harder for them to secure employment. Entrepreneurship presents a promising pathway to economic security and reintegration into communities as it requires minimal formal schooling, provides additional income and control over their livelihoods, and has the potential to uplift the often-low-income communities to which these individuals return. While entrepreneurship has great potential to reduce recidivism and promote economic stability, returning citizens have to overcome several hurdles in their entrepreneurship endeavors, ranging from a lack of access to capital, collateral consequences of having a criminal record, a digital skills gap, and limited access to wraparound support services. The paper will highlight two entrepreneurship training initiatives in Missouri and Washington, D.C. [This paper is a collaboration with the Association for Enterprise Opportunity (AEO).]

Income-driven repayment (IDR) plans are a subset of student loan repayment plans that cap a borrower's monthly payment at a percentage of their discretionary income, which is defined as a portion of a borrower's adjusted gross income (AGI) that exceeds a specified multiple of the federal poverty line (FPL) for the borrower's family size. A borrower may be in negative amortization under an IDR plan, which means that their monthly payment can be less than the interest that accrues in a given month, and the accumulation of unpaid interest may lead to an increase in their loan balance. Any loan balance that remains outstanding after the borrower has made qualifying payments according to an IDR plan for a maximum repayment period is to be forgiven. Over the last nearly 30 years, Congress and the Department of Education (ED) have created the following existing IDR plans: the Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) plan, two Income-Based Repayment (IBR) plans, the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) repayment plan, and the Revised Pay As You Earn (REPAYE) repayment plan. In January 2023, ED published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to make a number of substantial amendments to the federal student loan IDR plans. This report discusses the most frequently asked questions related to the proposed rules in the following areas: (1) background on IDR plans; (2) changes specific to the REPAYE repayment plan such as to borrower eligibility, monthly payments, interest benefits, and the maximum repayment period; (3) changes applicable to all IDR plans; other provisions related to delinquent and defaulted borrowers; and (4) the estimated cost of the proposed rules.

Experiential learning is critical to a smooth transition from higher education to the workforce. Work-based college courses, such as internships and practicums, may be useful in facilitating this transition. This paper applies an innovative text mining technique to identify and analyze work-based courses from transcript data. The paper examines patterns and post-degree labor market outcomes of taking work-based courses at two-year and four-year colleges in a large public college system. Findings show that approximately 15% of enrollees and 30% of graduates took a work-based course in the six years after college entry. Students typically earned credits from work-based courses, and they typically took the courses in later years of their programs. Moreover, work-based coursetaking varied largely across fields of study as well as colleges. While there was no significant racial disparity, female students, students who were younger at enrollment, and U.S.-born students were more likely to take the courses than their counterparts. Results show a positive association between work-based coursetaking in college and the probability of being employed after degree completion among both two-year and four-year degree completers, a positive association with post-degree earnings among four-year completers, and a negative association with post-degree earnings among two-year completers.

While the Pell Grant covers a substantial proportion of college tuition for low-income students, it has covered only two full-time semesters per year and has not included any support for summer courses through most of its history. As research has shown that continuous enrollment throughout the year increases college persistence and completion, the summer Pell (SP) program was added during the summer of 2009 and allowed eligible low-income students to receive an additional grant for summer tuition and eligible costs. The SP was eliminated in 2011 and then restored in 2017. Using administrative data on community college students in New York City, our difference-indifferences analysis results from both periods show that SP-eligible students had a higher retention rate in the fall of the second year, had higher associate and bachelor's degree attainment rates, and had higher earnings gains up to nine years from college entry compared to SP-ineligible students. Heterogeneous analysis indicates that the SP benefits were driven by Black students and older students.

Racialized individuals are generally more likely than their non-racialized and non-Indigenous counterparts to pursue a university-level education. Despite this, their labour market outcomes are often less favourable. Using data from the integrated file of the Postsecondary Student Information System, the 2016 Census and the T1 Family File, this article compares the employment earnings, unionization rate and pension plan coverage rate of racialized graduates with a bachelor's degree with those of non-racialized and non-Indigenous graduates, two years after graduation.

Many welfare programs give greater benefits to unmarried individuals than to a married couple of otherwise identical income. The resulting marriage penalty discourages marriage and rewards single parenthood. Combined marriage penalties across federal and state welfare programs can reach tens of thousands of dollars per year for a given family. One component of the marriage penalties comes from state-level free or subsidized preschool programs. In addition to a failed track record in providing high-quality preschool education, the majority of government-funded preschool programs also have severe marriage penalties. Marriage is highly beneficial to adults, children, and society as a whole. Policymakers should consider the implications of their programs on marriage and design policies that do not discourage marriage, and, in fact, actively promote marriage and support married couples with children. [This report was produced by Heritage Foundation, Center for Health and Welfare Policy.]

Numerous degree programs throughout the UNC System equip students with the requisite knowledge and skills for meaningful careers that generate excellent returns for both alumni and the North Carolina economy. This talent pool attracts businesses and residents to the state, expanding job opportunities, further developing the labor force, and fostering economic growth. Recent data from the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) on post-graduation debt and income, however, suggest that a substantial proportion of programs fail to generate satisfactory economic outcomes that reasonably enable alumni to pay back their student loan debt. The TPPF data demonstrate the performance of more than 900 bachelor's, master's, professional, and doctoral degree programs across North Carolina. By categorizing these programs based on the debt and income of their graduates, we are able to identify those programs that are most in need of oversight, reform, or closure. The report also allows prospective students and their families to make better-informed decisions regarding their college and later careers. Unlike resources that merely review the potential income for types of programs generally, the report provides detailed information on income and debt for specific programs at specific schools in North Carolina, providing a uniquely high-resolution picture of the financial risks and opportunities faced by UNC students today.