The Fair School Funding Plan
The Fair School Funding Plan represents years of work by legislators, local school leaders, and education finance experts to provide a predictable, student-centered formula based upon how much it costs to educate a child and how much a local community cand afford to contribute toward these costs. The funding plan was intended to be fully implemented over six years, with several important components of the formula being updated over time.
The bipartisan funding plan was adopted in HB 110 from the 134th General Assembly (2021-2022) and was updated in years 3 and 4 in Ohio’s last budget bill (HB 33 – 135th General Assembly, 2023-2024).
House Bill 96, State Operating Budget for Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027
The Executive Budget proposal contained in House Bill 96 continues the phase-in (years 5 and 6) of the Fair School Funding Plan. However, the proposal continues to use base cost components from Fiscal Year (FY) 22 data while the property and income values (i.e. local capacity) are based on more current data. This results in a shift of support to fund public schools with the local share of funding education increasing and the state responsibility decreasing.
Under the proposal, public school district formula funding decreases over the biennium by approximately $103 million when compared to FY 25 funding. Approximately 343 school districts (56%) experience a decrease in state formula funding from FY 25 to FY 26 and 360 districts (59%) in state formula funding from FY 26 to FY 27.
Talking Points
- Full implementation and updates to the funding plan will ensure that all children will be given the resources and supports needed to succeed in our schools.
- The Fair School Funding Plan funds schools more fairly by considering the different needs in Ohio’s small towns, large suburbs, big cities, and rural communities.
- The Fair School Funding Plan is a bipartisan plan supported by educators, parents, school administrators, and local leaders across Ohio.
- School districts need to budget for current prices. For example, your grocery or utilities bills are not the same as they were three years ago, and neither are school expenses.
- Without updating the base cost inputs, the funding formula does not keep up with the cost of educating students and shifts the burden of funding schools back to the local communities. This means our schools will be forced to continue over-relying on local tax levies, which are becoming harder to pass amid rising costs and property values.
- Under the proposal, the state’s responsibility to support public education drastically decreases to 32.3%. By comparison, in 1995 during the DeRolph Supreme Court Cases, which deemed the state funding system for public education at the time unconstitutional, the state share was 42%.
Urge Legislators to Support Public School Students!
