The Rural/Nonrural Divide? K–12 District Spending and Implications of Equity-Based School Funding

Abstract

In the 2013–2014 school year, the state of California implemented a new equity-minded funding system, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). LCFF increased minimum per-pupil funding for educationally underserved students and provided greater autonomy in allocating resources. We use the implementation of LCFF to enrich our understanding of rural school finance and explore the implications of equity-based school finance reform across urbanicity (i.e., between rural, town, suburban, and urban districts) and between rural areas of different remoteness. Drawing on 15 years of financial data from California school districts, we find variation in the funding levels of rural districts but few differences in the ways resources are allocated and only modest evidence of constrained spending in rural areas. Our results suggest that spending progressivity (i.e., spending advantage of higher-poverty districts) has increased since LCFF, although progressivity is lowest in rural districts by the end of the data panel.

Individual Factors Impacting on Chinese Students Undergraduate Enrollment Opportunity from the Perspective of Educational Equity

“…Due to its remote geographical location and small size, there are some structural disadvantages. For instance, the cost of transportation in rural districts may be higher than in urban districts, or rural teachers may have lower salaries than urban teachers [12]. The household registration system has become an administration system, which can result in an equality of job opportunities, medical care, and educational resources between rural and urban people [13].…”

Assessing the Impact of a Distance-Based Spatial Factor on Retention in the U.S. Colleges

“…This education funding reform also enabled local districts to spend the allocated state funding on areas most aligned to critic needs. After the adoption of LCFF, some districts have reported greater spending progressivity on educational programs [71]. It is critical for the state and local policy-makers to increase funding for career guidance in economically disadvantaged rural areas so that students can make informed decisions about their post-secondary education options.…”

Introduction to Special Topic: Rural Education Finance and Policy

“…In contrast, Dhaliwal and Bruno (2021) examine the school funding formula in a highly urban state, California, to generate more insights into rural school finance. They focus explicitly on the allocation of expenditures by districts.…”

“…It provided increased funding for disadvantaged students while simultaneously removing restrictions on categories of funding. Dhaliwal and Bruno (2021) look at 15 years of detailed finance data to assess how expenditure levels and distribution between rural and nonrural districts differ post the implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula, whether spending progressivity changed under the new formula, and whether the rural and nonrural districts spend the new funds differently.…”