At CRPE, our previous finance research centered on how funding systems could support the growth of charter schools and portfolio-style governance, with a strong emphasis on equity, transparency, and flexibility in resource allocation. We examined how traditional formulas often disadvantaged schools of choice and studied weighted or student-based funding models that might better match dollars to student needs.
Today, our focus has shifted to how education finance can help schools recover and adapt in the face of disruption. We study how pandemic-era funding was used, what lessons districts learned, and how the expiration of those funds creates new fiscal challenges. We also examine how shifting federal priorities—such as efforts to scale back or restructure education funding—affect schools’ capacity to innovate, sustain supports, and equitably serve all students. Across this evolution, our commitment remains the same: to understand how funding systems can be designed to meet student needs while enabling schools to respond to change.
Consideration of whether smaller classes are preferable to larger ones requires some recognition of the opportunity costs involved. This brief provides a state-by-state context by computing the dollars at stake in marginally raising the number of students per class.
Using wage and staffing data from states, this paper projects the financial and staffing implications of one innovative school model (the Rocketship lab rotation) to highlight potential impacts on the schooling workforce and total per-student spending.
This working paper examines how state finance policies that protect districts from declining or low enrollments drive up spending and inhibit adaptation.
This report offers the first detailed look into the financial implications for public schools embracing student-centered learning models.
This report offers the first detailed look into the financial implications for public schools embracing student-centered learning models.
This report identifies three fiscal requirements of federal education programs that stand in the way of promoting innovation in education. The authors recommend modifications that would break down barriers to innovation as well as promote smarter, fairer uses of taxpayer money to support public education.