Report takes a comprehensive look at the state of K-12 school facilities in California, focusing on state-level policies and funding patterns. The recommendations lay out a detailed framework that re-envisions the state’s role in K-12 infrastructure to appropriately support educational outcomes and contribute to sustainable communities through public infrastructure best practices of sound planning, effective management, adequate and equitable funding, and appropriate oversight. 75p

Report on state-by-state school funding levels reveals that states in the Northeast, along with WY and AK, provide much higher funding per student than Southern or Western states. The study also found that only 17 states have progressive funding systems and six have regressive systems. The report measured states along four criteria: average level of funding per pupil, funding distribution, progressivity of funds, and coverage, or "the proportion of school age children enrolled in the state's public school system." Six states were positioned well on all four measures: IA, MA, NJ, VM, KS and NM. The report concludes that most states "must improve on at least one area." 31p

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is one of Chicago’s leading financing tools for development. This white paper examines the nature of TIF funded public school construction projects. The paper begins by categorizing the types of schools receiving TIF revenues for construction projects and where they are located in the city. Next, student and community demographics of these schools are examined to get a sense of the socio-economic characteristics of the groups benefiting from the allocation of TIF revenues. The white paper finds that the TIF program is contributing to income and race/ethnicity place-based inequality in the city of Chicago. TIF financial support for school construction projects is uneven and polarized between high and low-income communities, neglecting the middle.School construction projects funded by TIF revenues favor exclusive schools (selective enrollment schools, charter schools and magnet schools, etc.) while underfunding inclusive neighborhood area attendance schools. This is directly playing a role in the move toward an inequitable, two-tiered public education system. 7p

Parents hoping to enroll their children in the best public schools have long known that where you live matters and that housing prices can be dictated by the quality of the nearby schools. This study quantifies that price gap, and the differences between the cost of living near a high-scoring public school and a low-performing one are striking.
The study found that housing costs in the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas were an average of 2.4 times as high – a difference of $11,000 a year – for homes near schools whose average test scores put them in the top fifth of schools in the area, compared with schools in the bottom fifth.
That means that a family would have to pay more per year to move into a good public school zone than for their children to attend some private schools. Translated into an average home price, the gap works out to an average of $205,000 more for a home near a high-performing school.

The study also found that within metropolitan areas, those with higher levels of economic segregation between neighborhoods and school zones had even wider gaps between average test scores. Of the 10 metro areas with the widest gaps in average test scores, six were in the Northeast, including Hartford, Buffalo and Philadelphia. 31p

Report to the U.S. Department of Education Excellence & Equity Commission on school facilities impact on educational equity. The report reviews court cases and studies and provides recommendations for the Commission. Acute disparities in the access of public school students to adequate facilities coupled with the compelling evidence of how poor quality school facilities are implicated in lower student achievement, make it imperative that any inquiry into educational inequity include an understanding of the conditions, design, utilization, and location of public school facilities. 13p

Focuses mainly on financial concerns covering areas such as bids, sources of state funds, selling or buying school property, bonds, capital outlay funds, and general loan information. Other statutes covered include architectural and engineering services, public contracts, classroom sizes, the duties of local educational and civic authorities, inspections, energy savings contracts, lease properties, long-range facility plans, the North Carolina Historical Commission, facilities guidelines, repair of damage to school property, replacement of buildings, and fire safety. 107p.

Analyzes the results of Arizona's 1998 school facilities lawsuit, the Students FIRST Act, on the state process for financing and constructing school facilities. The Students FIRST Act was established by Arizona's Legislature to address inequities in the state's system of financing capital improvements for public schools. This Act established Arizona's School Facilities Board. The document explores the Board's progress in funding new school facilities and renovation, and lists funding mechanisms that still need improvements. 40p.

Uses national data to provide review of charter school finance and uncovers patterns in both income and expenditures. Charter schools managed by education management organizations (EMOs) receive particular attention. The study's research questions focus on examining and comparing the amounts and sources of revenues and expenditures between charter schools and traditional public schools, and among several categories of charter school. 77p.

Reports on funding inequities between district and charter schools, with particular deficiencies in funding for charter school facilities. Charts illustrate where funding disparity for charter school facilities at the local, state, and federal levels exist. The difficulty of obtaining quality data is noted, as are changes in the situation over the last four years. 53p.

Reports that New York City charter schools receive $300 less per student than district schools, if housed in a public school building, but that charter schools that own their own buildings or lease them receive more than $3,000 less per student in public funding than district schools. Critics counter that charter schools, especially those housed in city-owned buildings, receive many hidden subsidies that either equalize or boost charter school resources above what district schools receive. Because of the complicated ways charter schools and district schools are funded, a fair comparison of how much money district and charter schools actually spend on students is difficult to draw. Questions of how charter schools are funded, and the effect of the city's practice of granting public building space to charters, are currently under heavy public scrutiny. 9p.

Examines the problem of school facility disparities in Michigan and the prospects of litigation to address the problem. The report examines the impact of facilities on students, teachers and communities, and then provides an overview of litigation aimed at state school finance systems across the U.S. Michigan law is then examined, followed by data reflecting the state's capital facilities problem and considerations of how it might be viewed by the courts. 12p.

GAO reviewed the experiences of three states that reformed their school finance systems, focusing on the: (1) reforms made to each school finance system; (2) legal, budgetary, and political pressures that their state legislatures faced in making the finance reforms; and (3) impact of the legislative remedies in addressing educational funding disparities. GAO found that: (1) lawsuits prompted each state to address the education funding disparities within its district; (2) the legislative solutions in all three states helped poor districts without harming the educational programs of wealthy districts and were sensitive to public sentiments concerning property taxes; and (3) other states undergoing similar education finance reforms should define the equity goals of their school finance systems in terms of the funding needed to achieve a certain level of student performance, link funding reform with greater accountability for student performance, and encourage all groups affected by education finance reform to participate in the decision-making process. 56p.

Examines data from every school in New York City to provide an overview of the most urgently overcrowded schools and school districts, and proposes a policy framework for the Department of Education (DOE) to tackle the crisis. The report found 515 school buildings with a total enrollment of 501,632 students (approximately 48% of the 1,042,078 students enrolled in the city's public schools that year) were either overcrowded or had associated temporary structures during the 2006/07 school year based on the city's own data available in its Enrollment-Capacity-Utilization Report for the same school year. Recommendations for relief of the situation are included and extensive tables illustrate the text. 270p.

Reports that 69 percent of overcrowded Chicago elementary schools have enrollments that are more than 50 percent Hispanic. Also reported is that whereas Hispanic students make up 43.5 percent of public elementary school enrollment, their presence at charter schools is only 35.1 percent. 23p.

Examines seventeen of the most important school finance and educational equity cases in this country from the viewpoint of the lawyers who litigated them with the goal of securing a quality education for every child. Outstanding lawyers in the field of school finance and educational equity wrote the articles providing an overview of the cases in which they were involved, where they primarily litigated the meaning and requirements of the state constitution education clauses, which determine the type of education the state is required to provide and fund. The articles cover seventeen states in all regions and involve rural and urban school districts and everything in between. 435p.

Reports on the the educational adequacy of Nebraska's numerous Class III school districts, which offer a wide array of school settings, from urban to extremely rural, and from the third largest school system in Nebraska to a single school district occupying a county in the western sandhills. The answers submitted by the superintendents and building administrators were compared and analyzed against the responses tendered in 1993. Significant differences were found between the opinions of the building administrators who participated in 1993 study and those who participated in the 2009 study. In 1993, 14% of building administrators perceived their facilities as overcrowded. In 2009, approximately 5% shared that perception. In 1993, 46% of building administrators held the perception that their facilities did not accommodate the use of technology. In 2009, 30% of building administrators had the same opinion. In 1993, 32% of the buildings were reported as air conditioned. In 2009, 94% of the buildings were reported as air conditioned. 281p.

Education institutions must keep a tight rein on spending in 2012 as they search for signs that the national economy is back on its feet. A slow, uncertain economic recovery has improved finances in some parts of the country, but for others, the absence of recovery may require further cuts. Describes the outlook in the following specific areas: funding; charter schools; construction; equity; closings; growth; maintenance & operations; No Child Left Behind; nutrition; security; technology; and sustainability.

Discusses a new paradigm for analyzing the effect of investment in physical capital on student achievement. Includes a comprehensive definition of school infrastructure as including deferred maintenance, new construction, renovation, retrofitting, additions to existing facilities, and major improvements to grounds. Pointing to the limitations of previous research, describes a new paradigm that reinforces the importance of investing not only in human and social capital but also physical capital to insure student success.

Illustrates the abandonment of public education consciousness as expressed in the de-funding of school facilities efforts.

Reviews 1968-1995 school desegregation court cases that have impacted school facilities, noting how the perceived impact of school facility condition on education has carried weight in the courts. 12 references are included.

Reviews recent school finance litigation, concerning equitable distribution of state funds. Citing cases in several states, the article describes the origins and outcomes of each case. Reflections on the lengthy process, unanticipated results, and the ability of some legislatures to even comply with the decisions are discussed. Ten references are included.

Explores fiscal interrelationships that underlay capital outlay funding, including the differences between rural and non-rural school districts. The study additionally focuses on the relationships between various capital outlay funding components and student achievement. The analysis determined the extent to which these specific factors affected spending by including two levels of rurality as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau along with SES, current expenditures, local wealth, and local support as variables. Rural and non-rural were found to be significantly different in net assessed valuation and capital outlay expenditure, but not bond passage rate. Socioeconomic status was significantly related to and a predictor of capital outlay expenditures. Capital outlay expenditure, net assessed valuation, nor rurality was significantly related to student achievement. The study identified how these capital outlay funding mechanisms in Oklahoma are related to one another and the effect they have as a group and individually on the ability of local educational leaders to address facility needs.

This study explored the interplay between quality facilities and school climate, charting the effects of facility conditions on student and teacher attitudes, behaviors, and performance within schools slated for renovations in a large metropolitan school district. The research applied a school leadership-building design model to explore how six characteristics of facility quality--movement, aesthetics, play of light, flexible and responsive classrooms, elbow room, and security--interact with four aspects of school climate: academic press, community engagement, teacher professionalism, and collegial leadership. Because the schools were older and participants in the research perceived them as being in great need of maintenance and repair, the school building characteristics were often described as absent qualities. The survey data revealed moderate to strong relationships between the quality of school facilities and school climate. The interviews further explicated these relationships. Two additional themes--counterbalance and equity--emerged as being significant to occupants' interactions with their current facilities. This study used a mixed-methods triangulation design-data transformation model. Specifically, school climate surveys, photo interviews with students, walking tours of the school facility, and formal interviews were triangulated to obtain complementary data and a more complete understanding of the educational facility to be renovated and its impact on occupants. [Authors' abstract]

This article presents an analysis of the school capital funding system in Kentucky since 1990, using the operating-revenue analysis concepts of horizontal equity, vertical equity, and fiscal neutrality. In general one could tentatively conclude that Kentucky's capital-funding system was reasonably equitable until an expansion of district options in 2003-04 was followed by greater measures of inequity. This analysis points to specific methods for Kentucky to restore equity to its school capital funding structure as well as a model for analysis of other capital funding systems.

Traditionally, financing the construction of school facilities has been a local responsibility. In the past several decades, states have increased their support for school facilities. Using data collected from various sources, this study first classifies the design of capital aid programs in all 50 states into various categories based on the scope of state aid, selection of capital projects, method of grant distribution, and formula components of the grant. Using NCES finance data from 1998 to 2002, we examine the relationship between the type of facilities aid program and the level of inequality in capital-outlay distribution in the states. [Authors' abstract]