School Funding in Ohio: From DeRolph to the Evidence-Based Model (EBM) and Beyond

Abstract

Beginning in 1997, a series of Ohio Supreme Court decisions ruled that Ohio's school foundation-based funding system was unconstitutional. Despite judicially mandated reform directives, little change was made until recently when Ohio adopted a modified Evidence-Based Model (EBM) into its statutory funding scheme. Ohio's EBM is intended to remedy many of the unconstitutional deficiencies found by the courts. However, due to artificial caps and guarantees on the funding that a district can receive, the EBM has yet to impact school funding in a major way. A review of the EBM, as enacted in Ohio, describes the changes to the system, as well as the shortcomings.

Labor versus capital in the provision of public services: Estimating the marginal products of inputs in the production of student outcomes✰

“…The problem with this approach is that legislators use the available budget, not the actual needs of students which usually exceeds the available budget, to determine the minimum per pupil revenue that a school district should receive. Historically, this approach has resulted in the underprovision of funding for low-income districts and the creation of one of the most unequal school funding systems in the U.S. by 1991 (Pittner et al 2010). The four Ohio Supreme Court decisions 16 , which all found the school funding system to be unconstitutional, did not force a specific new system.…”

“…its reliance on local funding) has remained unchanged. By 2009, Ohio is still ranked high (19th) in terms of inequality in its public-school funding (Pittner et al 2010). However, these litigations have had some positive impacts, such as the creation of the Ohio School Facilities Commission (in 1997).…”