k 12 education nonprofits

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

Learn How to Support Stressed and Anxious Students.

70 Top Education Nonprofits and Charities in 2024

These organizations support students and educators every day.

When it comes to schools and educational programs, it seems like there’s never enough money to go around. Fortunately, there are a lot of terrific education nonprofits and charities out there willing to help. If you’re looking for funding or resources for students, schools, or projects, these can be a good place to start.

Note: If you’re considering donating to or working with a charity, it’s always a good idea to check them out thoroughly using sites like Charity Navigator and GuideStar first.

General Education Nonprofits

Literacy education nonprofits, stem education nonprofits.

• Music and the Arts Education Nonprofits

Physical Education and Healthy Living Nonprofits

Adoptaclassroom.org.

This popular crowdfunding platform helps willing donors find teachers and programs who deserve their help.

Afterschool Alliance

Quality after-school programs keep kids off the streets and out of trouble. Afterschool Alliance helps communities fund these vital activities across the country.

Association of American Educators

AAE is the largest national, non-union, professional educators’ organization. They offer education resources, grants, support, and much more.

Carnegie Corporation of New York

The Carnegie Corporation has been around for more than 100 years. Their grants and programs support many educational endeavors, especially in urban areas.

CASEL (Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning)

This the nation’s leading nonprofit dedicated to social-emotional learning, providing free quality resources for teaching and learning on this important topic.

Children’s Scholarship Fund

This organization supplies scholarships to families in need so they can choose the schools and learning environments that are the best fit for their children, regardless of their ability to pay or where they live.

DonorsChoose

Another crowdfunding nonprofit, DonorsChoose lets teachers and schools ask for funding for specific projects, supplies, and other educational resources.

The Education Trust

This nonprofit org is committed to advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in the American education system.

Fund for Teachers

Professional development helps educators stay on top of their game and meet professional certification requirements. Fund for Teachers helps teachers access and pay for the PD they need and want.

Generation Teach

Although more than half of American students are people of color, fewer than one-quarter of educators and administrators are. This nonprofit seeks to correct the racial imbalance in our educational system.

This organization provides teachers with quality resources for civics learning, including topics like the Constitution, civil rights, citizenship, voting, and more.

Junior Achievement USA

JA community volunteers partner with local classrooms to provide educational activities on career readiness, leadership, financial literacy, and more.

Khan Academy

Teachers everywhere love Khan Academy for its free educational resources on every subject imaginable, and donors help keep everything free.

Let’s Get Ready

This organization helps low-income high school students get into college by providing free SAT preparation, admissions counseling, and other resources.

McCarthey Dressman Education Foundation

Innovative teachers can apply for grants to help them improve their classroom instruction with unique new methods and ideas.

The NEA Foundation

The NEA Foundation provides grants, programs, and professional development to support quality education for all students.

Pets in the Classroom

Many studies support the benefits of classroom pets for student learning and achievement. This org provides grants to help schools support pets in their classrooms.

Project Lead the Way

PLTW provides career awareness curriculum programs and resources for pre-K–12 students and teachers across the country.

Save the Children

Around the world and here in the United States (especially in rural areas), Save the Children works with vulnerable children whose educations are affected by crises and lack of resources.

Scholarship America

This philanthropic organization assists communities, corporations, foundations, and individuals with fundraising, managing and awarding scholarships to students in need.

S.E.E.K. Foundation

Through workshops and after-school programs, S.E.E.K makes STEM education accessible for K-12 children, especially minorities and those living in underserved communities.

SEO (Sponsors for Educational Opportunity)

The SEO Scholars project is a free eight-year academic program that gets low-income public high school students to and through college, with a 90% college graduation rate.

Teach for America

TFA works to engage more quality professionals in teaching in one of the low-income communities they serve, recruiting from colleges and providing the support and training they need as they serve.

Teaching Matters

This teacher development nonprofit is committed to increasing teacher effectiveness to prepare urban students with critical-thinking and college-readiness skills.

TNTP (The New Teacher Project)

Through impact consulting, research, advocacy, and leadership development, TNTP strives to increase academic experiences for young people of color and students experiencing poverty.

Year Up’s programs work with high school grads to help them gain valuable career-readiness skills, including community college education and networking connections.

826 National

This national youth writing organization is dedicated to helping K-12 students and schools improve their writing education programs.

American Association of School Librarians

As a division of the American Library Association, AASL supports school libraries, librarians, and library education with awards, conferences, publications, and more.

Barbara Bush Foundation

This foundation believes literacy is vital to our country and funds a wide variety of literacy programs to ensure all Americans can read fluently.

Children’s Literacy Initiative

CLI provides books and professional development programs that are independently evaluated and proven to transform learning outcomes for children.

Ezra Jack Keats Foundation

This foundation supports arts and literacy programs in public schools and libraries, including a Bookmaking Competition. They also celebrate new writers and illustrators of exceptional picture books for a diverse audience of children through the Ezra Jack Keats Awards.

The Stories for All Project™ curates high-quality books representing diverse races, cultures, and identities, and makes them available and affordable to kids in need.

International Literacy Association

The International Literacy Association (ILA) is a professional membership organization for literacy professionals across 128 countries.

Laura Bush Foundation for America’s Libraries

This organization provides grants to school libraries to expand, diversify, and update their collections.

The Lois Lenski Covey Association

Honoring the beloved writer, this nonprofit provides grants for the purchase of children’s books for bookmobile programs. They also fund grants to literacy programs in Baltimore, New York City, Philadelphia, Sacramento, and the San Francisco Bay area.

National Writing Project

This network of educators works to improve the teaching of writing and learning in schools and communities nationwide.

Reach Out and Read

Through a national network of clinicians, Reach Out and Read helps integrate reading into pediatric practices, advising families about the importance of reading with their children.

Room To Read

This global nonprofit works to improve literacy and gender equality in education in countries around the world.

Reading Is Fundamental

RIF is the oldest and largest nonprofit children’s literacy organization in the United States, providing books and reading resources to children nationwide.

This ed-tech organization provides a free online platform to help children learn to read, along with resources, tools, and content for teachers.

Snapdragon Book Foundation

Snapdragon wants to help school libraries add quality books to their collections, providing grants for materials, resources, and reading projects.

Sponsors of the popular Hour of Code project, this ed-tech nonprofit is also the largest provider of K-12 computer science curriculum programs in the United States.

Girls Who Code

Girls Who Code is on a mission to close the gender gap in technology by encouraging girls to take an interest in computer science, programming, coding, and more.

Kid Spark Education

Kid Spark programs help young students learn foundational STEM fluencies starting in pre-K and continuing through elementary and middle school.

This math-focused nonprofit works with students in grades 6 to 8 through the National Math Club and the MATHCOUNTS competition series.

National Math + Science Initiative

NMSI provides professional development programs for STEM educators, along with resources and support in their teaching endeavors.

NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics)

As the world’s largest math education nonprofit, NCTM organizes conferences, provides professional development, issues publications, and advocates for issues that matter to math educators.

NSTA (National Science Teaching Association)

Science educators turn to NSTA for resources, professional development, publications, conferences, events, and more.

This nonprofit professional association is for LGBTQ+ people in the STEM community, including educators. It’s committed to making STEM a safe and diverse environment for all.

Project Scientist

Project Scientist delivers STEM-focused summer and after-school programs in partnership with local schools and organizations, focusing on underserved and marginalized girls ages 4 to 18.

SAE Foundation

Funds raised by the SAE Foundation support SAE International’s award-winning A World in Motion® (AWIM®) PreK-12 STEM education program and STEM scholarships.

Music and Arts Education Nonprofits

Americans for the arts.

Americans for the Arts is the nation’s leading nonprofit organization for advancing the arts and arts education.

Arthur Miller Foundation

This foundation provides equitable access to quality theater education in public schools, providing scholarships, resources, and support to new certified theater teachers.

Classics for Kids Foundation

CFKF works to build stringed-instrument education programs in schools, providing grants for instruments, instruction, and more.

Council for Art Education

This nonprofit promotes visual art education for all K-12 students and encourages funding for quality school art programs.

Guitars (and Ukes) in the Classroom

As the name implies, this organization works to put guitars and ukuleles into classrooms, making free music education a possibility for more students.

The Mockingbird Foundation

The Mockingbird Foundation provides funding for music education for children through competitive grants, emergency-related grants, and tour-related grants.

The Mr. Holland’s Opus Foundation

This music education nonprofit provides vital support services to school districts and new musical instruments to underfunded music programs nationwide

National Art Education Association

The NAEA funds grants for innovative initiatives to support instructional practice, research, and leadership in visual arts education.

Through a variety of school and community programs, P.S. Arts works to correct the inequities in public school arts education in underserved areas.

Save the Music Foundation

Save the Music partners with school districts and local communities to build sustainable music programs through grants for new musical instruments, technology, equipment, and resources.

Action for Healthy Kids

Through a variety of programs, this nonprofit helps support nutrition, physical education, and social-emotional learning in schools and communities.

Common Threads

Common Threads provides cooking and nutrition education classes taught by trained chefs, as well as providing training to caregivers, educators, and healthcare professionals.

This organization fills the fitness opportunity gap with structured programs that get kids moving, help them fall in love with fitness, and set them up for successful, healthy futures.

Girls on the Run

GOTR designs programming that strengthens 3rd- to 8th-grade girls’ social, emotional, physical, and behavioral skills through physical activity.

Good Sports

Good Sports works directly with the sporting goods industry to obtain a variety of athletic gear, apparel, and footwear that is then donated to children and community sports programs in need.

Green Our Planet

Green Our Planet trains teachers to use school gardens and hydroponic laboratories to teach students STEM, conservation, nutrition, and entrepreneurship.

National Fitness Foundation

The official charity of the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition, this program supports fitness education by emphasizing student health, goal setting, and personal progress.

SHAPE America

The Society of Health and Physical Educators supports instructors in these fields with professional development, publication, grants, awards, and other resources.

Slow Food USA School Garden Network

Slow Food USA’s School Garden Network aims to connect youth with their food by teaching them how to grow, cook, and enjoy real food.

Whole Kids is a project supported by Whole Foods, providing garden grants to schools and promoting healthy eating through garden clubs and education.

Do you have any tips to share on working with education nonprofits for school funding? Come share your ideas and ask for advice in the We Are Teachers HELPLINE group on Facebook .

Plus, 54+ unique fundraiser ideas and events for schools ..

You Might Also Like

Virtual Rewards That Work For In-Person And Online Classrooms

Virtual field trips, digital stickers, playlist picks, and more! Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

• Twitter Channel
• Facebook Profile
• YouTube Channel
• Instagram Profile
• Linkedin Profile
• Pinterest Profile

Equity-Driven • Data-Centered • Student-Focused

Our Mission

The Education Trust is committed to advancing policies and practices to dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in the American education system. Through our research and advocacy, Ed Trust improves equity in education from preschool through college, engages diverse communities dedicated to education equity and justice, and increases political and public will to build an education system where students will thrive.

How We Advance Our Mission

Although many organizations speak up for the adults employed by schools and colleges, we speak up for students, especially those whose needs and potential are often overlooked. We evaluate every policy, every practice, and every dollar spent through a single lens: what is right for students. We carry out our mission in three primary ways:

• We work alongside educators, parents, students, policymakers, and civic and business leaders in communities across the country, providing practical assistance in their efforts to transform schools and colleges into institutions that serve all students well.
• We analyze local, state, and national data and use what we learn to help build broader understanding of achievement and opportunity gaps and the actions necessary to close them.
• We actively work to shape and influence national and state policy, bringing lessons learned from on-the-ground work and from unflinching data analyses to build the case for policies that will help all students reach high levels of achievement.

Our Core Beliefs

• We believe in the power of education to close the gaps that separate students from low-income backgrounds and students of color from other young Americans.
• We believe schools and colleges, appropriately organized, can help virtually all students master the knowledge they need to succeed.
• We believe long-standing gaps in opportunity, achievement, and attainment have roots inside and outside of schools. And though we know these gaps are stubborn, we also know they are not inevitable.
• We believe a strong education improves the lives of young people, is vital to sustaining our democracy, and strengthens America.

Transforming Education So Every Young Person Thrives

Tntp is an education nonprofit that brings research, policy, and consulting together to reimagine america’s public education system..

Third-grade students excited to learn science at J.M. Ullom Elementary in Las Vegas. The school is a teaching site for members of the Nevada Teacher Corps.

We envision a P K – 12 experience for every young person that upends the predictive influence of poverty and race on their life outcomes and fuels innovation and growth across our country.

As a leading education nonprofit since 1997, we have combined insight, courage, and action to conceive scalable solutions that address complex challenges from the classroom to the systems level. Today, we work side by side with educators, system leaders, and communities across 39 states and more than 6,000 districts nationwide to reach ambitious goals for student success.

Our vision pushes beyond school walls, catalyzing cross-sector collaboration to create pathways for young people to achieve academic, economic and social mobility.

We work with schools, districts, and county and state education agencies—as well as students, families, and communities—to ensure every young person is on a path to academic, social, and economic mobility.

Impact Consulting

Research, policy, and advocacy, leadership development and talent services, community engagement and coalition building, since 2020 alone, we have improved academic experiences for millions of students—primarily young people of color and students experiencing poverty. .

After partnering with TNTP, teachers and leaders report feeling better equipped to improve instructional practices and increase student engagement. Students receive stronger teaching, challenging assignments, and high-quality instructional materials . And the adults around them are more likely to hold them to high standards —a key predictor of academic success.  

more students received stronger instruction

more students engaged with grade-appropriate assignments

more students had teachers and leaders who held them to high academic standards  

Our Work in Action

Publication | April 25, 2024

Arkansas is pursuing promising strategies to address teacher shortages and become a national leader in teacher recruitment.

Case Study | April 22, 2024

Building a New Foundation with High-Quality Instructional Materials

New Jersey’s Passaic Public Schools and TNTP revamp curriculum with strategic selection of bilingual HQIM and see fast results in student mastery of grade-level standards.

Blog Post | April 1, 2024

Join TNTP in Embracing Multilingualism as a Superpower

As we celebrate Multilingual Advocacy Month, TNTP is deepening our support through research, policy, and opportunities for authentic engagement.

Publication | March 4, 2024

Unlocking Learning Acceleration for Multilingual Learners

Our report, "Unlocking Learning Acceleration for Multilingual Learners," highlights innovative strategies from six districts and key recommendations to supercharge ML success.

Blog Post | February 6, 2024

TNTP’s Next Chapter: Every Generation Thrives

Learn about TNTP’s bold new North Star: transforming the PK-12 education system to drive academic, economic, and social mobility for all young people.

Publication | September 25, 2018

The Opportunity Myth

We’ve been telling students that school prepares them for the future. Unfortunately, that’s a myth.

Ready to get started?

Let’s Work Together

Learn how we can partner to make meaningful change for your school.

Stay in the Know

Sign up for updates on our latest research, insights, and high-impact work.

" * " indicates required fields

• Education Savings Accounts
• School Vouchers
• Tax-Credit ESAs
• Tax-Credit Scholarships
• Individual Tax Credits and Deductions
• School Choice in America
• Research Library – main
• Schooling in America Survey Dashboard
• Public Opinion Tracker
• Project Nickel
• School Choice Bibliography
• EdChoice Experts
• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia
• Washington, D.C.
• Puerto Rico
• U.S. Virgin Islands
• Northern Mariana Islands
• American Samoa

How America’s Students Access K–12 Education

The vast majority of parents in our survey have enrolled their children in public district schools.

Assigned Public District School

Private School Out-of-Pocket

Out of District Public School

• Charter School
• Home School

Private Educational Choice Program (ESAs, Vouchers, Tax-Credit Scholarships)

Parents’ Schooling Preferences by School Type

Actual enrollment

Preferences

• Public District School
• Private School

RECEIVE EDUCATIONAL CHOICE UPDATES STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

• First Name *
• Last Name *
• © 2024 EdChoice
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

• Philanthropy News Digest

Stepping Up: The Top K-12 Education Foundations in the Nation

Nine of the fifty highest-performing K-12 education foundations — in terms of resources, long-term sustainability, investments in programs, and human capital — in 2016 were in Florida, a report from the Caruthers Institute finds. Based on eight performance indicators — annual revenues, revenues per student, total assets, assets per student, investment income, total program expenses, expenses per student, and volunteers — the report, Stepping Up: The Top K-12 Education Foundations in the Nation 2016 (22 pages, PDF), also found that eight of the top fifty K-12 education foundations were located in Texas, while five were in Utah and four were in California. The Pinellas Education Foundation in Largo, Florida, ranked first, as it has every year since the rankings were first issued four years ago, while Achieve Minneapolis and Chattanooga Hamilton County Public Education Fund ranked in the top five for the third year in a row.

Related content

Indigenous education training in Canada receives $9.73 million boost

Pew Charitable Trusts announces launch of Opportunity Broadband

Gates foundation commits $23 million for college support in covid era, walton family foundation awards $20 million for educator diversity, featured research briefs.

A report from the Schott Foundation for Public Education found that, despite a commitment from education philanthropy funders to change grantmaking practices amid the racial justice protests of 2020, total grant dollars awarded in support of racial equity and racial justice work have declined  compared to the years before 2020.

What aspect of education should philanthropic support prioritize?

• Racial equity initiatives
• Access to quality education for underserved communities
• Teacher training and support programs
• Student empowerment and leadership development

The nonprofit news you need

Get the latest nonprofit news, funding opportunities, job openings, and more delivered to your inbox with Philanthropy News Digest newsletters.

Candid gets you the information you need to do good.

To subscribe, select any of the newsletters listed below.

• RFP Bulletin
• Job Bulletin
• PND Connections

• Search for: Search
• Get Free Newsletters

Top K-12 Education Foundations Ranked in National Study

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Local K-12 education foundations with $2 million or more in annual revenues topped a performance ranking of these nonprofit organizations that support individual school districts. Foundations with smaller treasure chests were also recognized in the report, which was released in September.

Among the top 10, four are Florida-based foundations, and two of the organizations—those in Omaha, Neb., and San Francisco, Calif.—are aligned with districts that have smaller student populations. (Omaha is the 98th largest district in the country, and San Francisco is 72nd.)

According to “Stepping Up: The Top Education Foundations in the Nation,” the top 10 are:

• Pinellas Education Foundation (Florida)
• Clark County Public Education Foundation (Nevada)
• Omaha Schools Foundation (Nebraska)
• Denver Public Schools Foundation (Colorado)
• Philadelphia Education Fund (Pennsylvania)
• Hillsborough Education Foundation (Florida)
• The Fund for Public Schools (New York)
• The Foundation for Osceola Education (Florida)
• San Francisco Education Fund (California)
• Foundation for Seminole County Public Schools (Florida)

In the 100 largest school districts, K-12 education foundations spent more than $110 million on grants and programs for teachers and students. They raised more than $230 million to enhance public education, and they have assets of $322 million, which is a measure of their long-term sustainability, according to the study.

Dewey Caruthers, author of the survey, said he chose to base rankings on financial information from the foundations’ IRS filings because they provide objective data, but he recognizes “it could lead people to believe ‘it’s all about the money’.” In fact, the more money a foundation has, the more it can devote to program offerings, scholarships, and other contributions to K-12 education, he said. Further, a better-endowed foundation is sometimes more likely to have its assets invested for income and sustainability—although not always.

Caruthers maintains that parents are often unaware of the work these organizations do. “Some of the best ideas on improving student performance have come through education foundations,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that parents are often unaware of them.”

For next year, Caruthers is looking for a way to evaluate program performance. “The problem is, not all these foundations have common programs I can compare to each other,” he said. While most have dropout prevention and teacher recognition programs, there is no one program across all organizations, he said, so comparisons “wouldn’t be just ‘apples and oranges,’ but ‘watermelons and grapes’,” said Caruthers, who is president of dewey & associates.

“I want to see K-12 education foundations look more at measurement, data, and reporting,” he said.

Additional rankings of foundations, by size, are:

Top Five Foundations with $1 million to $1,999,999 in Revenues

• Brevard Schools Foundation (Florida)
• Polk Education Foundation and Business Partnership (Florida)
• Alpine School District Foundation (Utah)
• Cypress-Fairbanks Educational Foundation (Texas)
• Northside Education Foundation (Texas)

Top Five Foundations with $500,000 to $999,999 in Revenues

• Lewisville Education Foundation (Texas)
• Fort Bend ISD Education Foundation (Texas)
• Pasco Education Foundation (Florida)
• Plano ISD Education Foundation (Texas)
• Jordan Education Foundation (Utah)

Top Five Foundations with Revenues Under $500,000

• Futures Foundation for Volusia County Schools (Florida)
• Pasadena ISD Education Foundation (Texas)
• Loudoun Education Foundation (Virginia)
• BEST Education Foundation (Texas)
• Chesterfield Public Education Foundation (Virginia)

Most Popular

• FCC Votes to Reinstate Net Neutrality Protections, Reversing Trump-Era Changes April 26, 2024
• Districts Face an Absenteeism Crisis. They’re Looking for Products That Can Help  April 25, 2024
• Texas District Seeks Professional Development; N.C. System to Buy Supplemental Math, Science Software April 25, 2024
• Inside a School District’s Search for Sustainable Ed Tech April 25, 2024
• An Ed-Tech Venture Funding ‘Collapse’ During Q1 of 2024 April 25, 2024

Related Posts

India’s mobile learning app byju’s reaps new venture capital, and czi makes partial exit, global demand for k-12 devices outstrips supply, creating more delays for schools, the edweek market brief fall summit: key district insights and peer-to-peer connections, leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Schedule a Tour

Username or Email address *

Remember me

Lost your password?

Improving Equity in the K-12 Education System Requires Two Bold Priorities

What is giving compass.

We connect donors to learning resources and ways to support community-led solutions. Learn more about us .

Research suggests students have experienced more unfinished learning over the last year than ever before. With the COVID-19 pandemic waning, school systems are facing a critical choice about how to respond. To move forward, we must focus on two bold priorities : Accelerating students back to grade level, and adding one million new teachers of color to our schools in the next decade. These priorities can help to create a stronger, more equitable education system.

Learning Acceleration

As teachers return to the classrooms, should they use the traditional approach of reviewing all the content students missed, known as remediation? Or should they start with the current grade’s content and provide “just-in-time” supports when necessary, known as learning acceleration?

A May 2021 report by TNTP and Zearn, a nonprofit organization whose online math platform is used by one in four elementary students in the United States, provides one of the first direct comparisons of these two approaches — and compelling new evidence that school systems should make learning acceleration the foundation of their academic strategies next year and beyond. Findings include:

• Students of color and those from low-income backgrounds were more likely than their white, wealthier peers to experience remediation — even when they had already demonstrated success on grade-level content.
• Students who experienced learning acceleration struggled less and learned more than students who started at the same level but experienced remediation instead.
• Learning acceleration was particularly effective for students of color and those from low-income families.

This is strong evidence that learning acceleration works, and that it could be key to unwinding generations-old academic inequities the COVID-19 pandemic has only exacerbated.

Diversifying the Teaching Profession

To help students accelerate back to grade-level after the disruption of the pandemic, schools will need more great teachers than ever. And as a growing body of research and years of advocacy by civil rights organizations and education leaders of color has shown, the U.S. has an especially urgent need for teachers of color. While all students benefit from having teachers of color — in the form of greater engagement, higher achievement, and cross-cultural interactions — the benefits are most significant for students of color . Students with the same racial or ethnic background as their teacher are more likely to complete high school and go to college, less likely to be suspended, and more likely to be referred to gifted and talented programs. For Black students, having just one Black teacher in elementary school can improve their lives far into adulthood .

Yet across the country, teachers don’t look like the students they serve. While 53% of students in the United States identify as people of color , 80% of teachers are white, and 40% of public schools don’t have a single teacher of color . Further, our own analysis of teacher preparation programs nationwide has shown that they are significantly whiter, on average, than the public school population: In the 50 states and Washington D.C., enrollees at teacher preparation programs — quite literally the future teaching workforce —are nearly 64% white, while public school students are 47% white. Without immediate action, this teacher diversity gap will widen as schools lay off teachers to close looming budget deficits, since “last-in, first-out” layoff rules often disproportionately affect teachers of color. For the teacher workforce to mirror student demographics, we would need to add one million teachers of color to our nation’s schools.

We have an opportunity in this critical moment to transform the demographics of the teaching profession — as evidenced by the growing network of practitioners focused on the issue, a federal administration that has signaled this issue as a priority for K-12 education along with similar signals among some states, grassroots organizers and advocates who are ready to engage and mobilize, and a growing public awareness of systemic racism.

How Donors Can Help

Providing students with diverse, talented teachers and the challenging, engaging school experiences that can accelerate them back to grade level is possible — and will create far better learning experiences for many students than they received before the COVID-19 pandemic. Donors can help advance these efforts by supporting organizations with explicit commitments to:

• Recruiting and/or retaining educators of color;
• Advancing policies at the state and federal level that promote diversification of the educator workforce;
• Providing teachers and schools with the resources and support to make learning acceleration a reality for all students; and/or
• Exploring and improving their own commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion so that staff and leadership reflect the communities they serve.

More Articles

Bringing stem education to rural schools, apr 27, 2024, data on opportunities within rural school districts, brookings institute, apr 26, 2024.

Become a newsletter subscriber to stay up-to-date on the latest Giving Compass news.

Giving Compass Network

Partnerships & services.

We are a nonprofit too. Donate to Giving Compass to help us guide donors toward practices that advance equity.

Trending Issues

Copyright © 2024, Giving Compass Network

A 501(c)(3) organization. EIN: 85-1311683

Enter search terms here.

This search returns results from both GiveWell's main site and from the GiveWell Blog.

Search form

Us charities involved in k-12 education.

• A note on this page's publication date

The content on this page has not been recently updated. This content is likely to be no longer fully accurate, both with respect to the research it presents and with respect to what it implies about our views and positions.

In 2007, GiveWell invited New York based charities to apply for grants in three categories: Cause 3: Early Childhood Education, Cause 4: K-12 Education, and Cause 5: Employment Assistance. For more on our process of identifying and inviting organizations see our page on How we found applicants . This page discusses our process and priorities in evaluating organizations applying under Cause 4: K-12 Education.

Table of Contents

The achievement gap, the challenge of measuring success, our process, organizations that advanced passed our round 2 application process:, organizations that advanced passed our round 1 application process:, achievement first, double discovery center, harlem center for education, learning through an expanded arts program (leap), leadership enterprise for a diverse america (leda), new visions for public schools, replications, inc., st. aloysius, student sponsor partners, our priorities in evaluating charities in this cause.

Our overview of the achievement gap discusses the large discrepancy between different groups in the U.S. - both socioeconomic (e.g., high- vs. low-income families) and ethnic (e.g., African-American vs. white). The same groups that score lower on measures of academic achievement also have lower incomes and even higher incarceration rates, a phenomenon that has made some conjecture that education is a key to later-life success. The charities we examined for this cause aim to improve academic outcomes for disadvantaged youth (generally low-income members of underperforming ethnic groups). Yet it's important to recognize that this achievement gap is already present before children enter kindergarten , and grows only slightly afterward . Any organization focused on K-12 education, therefore, is likely trying to help children who are already struggling - and simply equalizing the quality of education (for underperforming and overperforming groups) would not necessarily close the achievement gap between them. We therefore feel it is appropriate to approach the cause of K-12 education with skepticism . We cannot assume that a program is improving children's academic performance simply because it is providing them with extra support or moving them to better schools; instead, we seek a program with a compelling empirical case.

Ideally, we would consider not just a charity's effect on students' academic performance, but its long-term effect on their lives. Much of the research on early childhood care attempts to gauge the impact of care on a variety of later life outcomes, including clients' mental health and their likelihood of having a criminal record; however, we believe that very little similar research exists on the impact of K-12 education. (We have seen a few studies on the correlation between academic performance and later earnings, but academic performance can reflect pre-existing abilities; we have seen no studies attempting to isolate the effect of education on earnings.) In the absence of data on later life outcomes, we have chosen to focus - for this cause - on charities' abilities to improve their clients' academic performance . This choice meshes with the way applicants chose to make their case, in our open-ended application; applicants commonly sent information about their applicants' high school graduation rates and achievement test scores (and less commonly about other academic-related measures, such as attendance rates and college enrollment rates). In our view, however, it is not enough to demonstrate that a program's participants outperform non-participants (as many of our applicants did). In evaluating education-related data, we believe that selection bias is a major issue : the fact that one student enters a program (charter school, summer school, tutoring session, etc.) while another does not may indicate pre-existing differences in ability and/or motivation that cause the students both to act differently (i.e., one enters the program and one does not) and to perform differently (i.e., one has more academic success than the other), regardless of the effects of the program itself . One good example of this phenomenon is seen in the research on the Federal Talent Search program : program participants outperformed non-participants in many ways (including test scores) that could not be plausibly attributed to the program. Our strongest applicants demonstrate an impact on student performance that is difficult to attribute to pre-existing differences between participants and non-participants.

We invited a total of 113 organizations to apply within this cause. (Details of how we found applicants .) 50 completed our Round 1 application; 54 did not apply (the remaining 9 applied in other causes). The goal of our Round 1 application was to identify the charities most likely to be able to demonstrate proven past success in improving educational outcomes for disadvantaged students, in keeping with our principle of focusing on already-proven programs . Details on the criteria we used to choose finalists - along with the applications of all who applied, finalists and non-finalists - are available at our page on K-12 education: Round 1 applicants . We named 12 finalists, all of which provided at least some evidence on the performance of their clients vs. non-clients that we felt was worth a second look (either because it showed very large differences, or because we had reasons to believe that the selection bias issues discussed above might not be a problem). After carefully reviewing all 12 second-round applications, we concluded that 3 of our applicants (the ones discussed under Organizations that advanced passed our Round 2 application process ) had provided sufficient evidence to assess their effectiveness. For the other 9 , we concluded that there were too many questions about the available data (most of them pertaining to selection bias concerns, or simply to small and unrepresentative data sets) to conclude that their programs have empirically demonstrated effectiveness. For more on our process see our How We Identify Top Charities page.

List of finalist charities for this cause

• Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP)
• Teach For America (TFA)
• Children's Scholarship Fund (CSF)

In addition to the 3 organizations above, the following 9 organizations advanced passed Round 1 of our application process in 2007.

What they do: Achievement First is a network of 12 charter schools serving 2500 students in Connecticut (New Haven and Bridgeport) and Brooklyn. 1 (3 more schools will be opening during fall of 2008.)

Available evidence: Achievement First sent us achievement test score data from selected classes, showing large gains for 5th grade students and higher overall scores than students in nearby public schools. 2

Why we don't recommend this organization: We aren't confident that the results Achievement First submitted are representative of the organization as a whole. We were sent data only for selected classes, and were not able to obtain much more data independently (as we were for KIPP) or to locate studies specifically addressing concerns about selection bias (as we did for KIPP).

Materials submitted in 2007

• Achievement First. Application response - Round 2 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. Application response - Round 1 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. Application - Round 2 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. New York Times Magazine Article Referencing Achievement First (2006) (PDF).
• Achievement First. Publicly Available Test Data (2007) (XLS).
• Note: five "school dashboards" (with enrollment, budget, and student characteristics data for 2007) withheld due to confidentiality request
• Achievement First. Achievement First List of funders with NY denotation (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. General Information: Mission Statement, Number of Staff, and Relationships with Other Organizations (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. IRS 501C3 Status Approval Letter (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. AF Central Trustee names and affiliations 2007-08 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. AF Senior Leadership Bios 8-07 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. AF Central Funding Sources FY06 and FY07 (2007) (PDF).
• Achievement First. AF Central Budgets -- 2007 and 2008 (2007) (XLS).
• Achievement First. AF Central 2006 Audit (2006) (PDF).

Double Discovery Center requested complete confidentiality for all of its application materials. We are therefore unable to give the full details of our reasoning. Overall, we found Double Discovery Center to be similar to other applicants in this section, in that it provided data that we felt was insufficient due to issues along the lines of those discussed above.

What they do: Harlem Center for Education is a community organization running programs focused on low-income youth and adults in Harlem, including the federally funded (and evaluated) Talent Search Program, which aims to increase the likelihood that low-income students attend college through, among other things, college counseling, SAT preparation, and tutoring. 3

Available evidence: As our overview of the Federal Talent Search Program states, we are somewhat optimistic about the program's general approach, but not enough to support an organization simply because the organization is affiliated with this program. HCE did submit a comparison of college enrollment rates for its students relative to the average enrollment for low-income students in New York State. 4

Why we don't recommend this organization: Insufficient empirical case due to concerns over selection bias. We find it likely that a student's choice to participate in – and complete – the Talent Search program is reflective of other relevant characteristics which would lead to higher graduation rates, a concern that is born out by existing evidence about the program at the federal level .

• Harlem Center for Education. Application response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• Harlem Center for Education. National Talent Search evaluation (2006) (PDF).
• Harlem Center for Education. 2005-06 Annual Progress Report (2006) (PDF).
• Harlem Center for Education. Other statistics (2007) (DOC).

What they do: LEAP runs a variety of programs; its application focused on the ALLL (Active Learning Leads to Literacy) program, 100 hours (20 weeks, 1 hr per day) of instruction in arts and other non-academic subjects to students in grades K-2. 5 The program includes in-class instruction and field-trips and is administered jointly between the students' teacher (for 3 days out of the week) and a LEAP instructor (for 2 days of the week). 6

Available evidence: In a pilot study of ALLL including 5,337 students at 25 schools, students randomly assigned to ALLL classrooms showed better yearly gains on the Early Childhood Language Assessment System (ECLAS) tests than did students randomly assigned to non-ALLL control classes. 7

Why we don't recommend this organization: The ALLL program only constitutes about 13% 8 of LEAP's total expected budget for 2007-08; 9 we do not have sufficient empirical evidence about LEAP's wide variety of other activities.

• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Application response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Application - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Application response - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Descriptions of Instructional Approaches (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2003-06 Evaluation of ALLL Pilot Program (2006) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Jan-Aug 2006 Evaluation of ALLL “Phase I” Expansion (2006) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2005-2006 Evaluation Report for ALLL Program (2006) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2006-07 ECLAS Test Result Analysis for ALLL Program (2007) (XLS).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). Staff Bios (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). IRS 501C3 Approval Letter (2007) (PDF).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2007 Board of Directors (2007) (DOC).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2006-07 Budget (2007) (XLS).
• Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP). 2007-08 Budget (2007) (XLS).

What they do: LEDA holds a seven-week program at Princeton University, targeting students from minority (African-American, Latino, and Native American) backgrounds 10 and relatively low-income families. 11 The program consists largely of college-style academic work that aims to prepare students academically and socially for college. 12 In addition, the program offers student-specific guidance to help scholars prepare for the college application process. 13

Available evidence: In a study of participants in the first year of the program, LEDA found that its scholars are more likely to enroll in selective colleges than those who were finalists but ultimately not selected for the program. 14

Why we don't recommend this organization: We found that LEDA scholars and non-scholar finalists cannot safely be compared. LEDA scholars are significantly more academically proficient than finalists who aren't selected, 15 leading us to believe that the difference between scholars' and finalists' performance may be a reflection of their abilities rather than any impact of the program.

• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Application - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Application response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Affirmative/Quantifiable Action? – Collins (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Hispanic Initiative Evaluation (Liza's Study) (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Admitted Students' schools, zip codes, gender, ethnicity, and income 2004/05 (No Names) (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Admitted Students' schools, zip codes, gender, ethnicity, and income 2005/06 (No Names) (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Liza's Study: Control Group Final Graphs (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Liza's Study: Control Group Admissions Information (No Names) (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Liza's Study: LEDA's Latino Students' Admissions Information (No Names) (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). List of LEDA Scholars Current College Enrollment (By School) (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). 1st LEDA Cohort's Performance Data (SAT, GPA etc.) And College Attended (No Names) (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Percentage of 1st Cohort With Family Income greater than and less than $60,000 (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 1st Cohort Families In Each Income Quintile (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Percentage of 2nd Cohort With Family Income greater than and less than $60,000 (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 2nd Cohort Families In Each Income Quintile (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 1st Cohort Students Eligible for Free Lunch Program (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 2nd Cohort Students Eligible for Free Lunch Program (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 1st Cohort Students Eligible for Reduced Lunch Program (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Number of 2nd Cohort Students Eligible for Reduced Lunch Program (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Description of LEDA's Recruitment Process (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). SAT Composites-#s 3-19-07 [ Note: student names removed. ] (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Comma Delimited Student Performance Data in 2006 (No Names) (2007) (CSV).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Comma Delimited Student Performance Data in 2007 (No Names) (2007) (CSV).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Comma Delimited Student Performance Data in 2008 (No Names) (2007) (CSV).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). New Board Member Bio: Denise Hurley (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). List of Gifts 2007 (2007) (PDF).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). List of Gifts 2008 (2007) (PDF).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). New Board Member Bio: Jack L Rivkin (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Organizational Chart of Current Staff (2007) (PUB).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Brochure: Board Members List and Mission Statement (2007) (PUB).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). New Board Member Bio: Lynn B Thoman (2007) (DOC).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Operating Budget 9/1/07-8/31/08 (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Budget 7/1/06-6/30/07 (2007) (XLS).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2007 (2007) (PDF).
• Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). Mellon Foundation Audit of LEDA's 2007 Budget and Actual Expenses (2007) (PDF).

What they do: New Visions runs a wide variety of programs aiming to improve NYC's public schools. Its New Century High Schools (NCHS) Initiative replaced large high schools with smaller schools; its other programs focus largely on training, information sharing, and other resources for teachers and school leaders.

Available evidence: A third-year report on the NCHS Initiative compared students at NCHS small schools to students at comparison schools who were otherwise similar, as measured by characteristics including ethnicity, eligibility for free- and reduced-price lunch, and previous achievement test scores; NCHS students had higher attendance rates and grade promotion rates, but lower scores on Regents exams. 16 A fourth-year report found similar results (higher graduation rates, fewer students graduating with Regents and Advanced Regents diplomas) using a similar though not identical methodology. 17

Why we don't recommend this organization: Our concerns about the NCHS study include (a) the fact that students appeared to perform better on measures that are directly controlled by the school (e.g., grade promotion and graduation) but not on more direct measures of performance (e.g., performance on Regents exams); (b) the fact that while students were matched on some observable characteristics, this technique does not fully account for potential selection bias in the students who choose to attend NCHS schools (and in particular - unlike the analysis we did for KIPP - does not show any measure by which NCHS and non-NCHS students started at comparable levels and improved at different rates); (c) evaluations of ongoing small schools projects do not provide evidence of an effect on academic achievement. 18

In addition, New Visions's focus now appears to be on other programs, particularly teacher and principal training programs, for which we have not seen an empirical case.

• New Visions for Public Schools. Application Response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Application Response - Round 2 (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Cause 4-NCHS Year 3 Evaluation (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. CAUSE 4-NVPS proposal (2007) (DOC).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Cause 4-PSO report July 2007 (2007) (PPT).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Cause4-NCHS report July 2007 (2007) (PPT).
• New Visions for Public Schools. General Information I.A.fact sheet (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific I.A. NCHS annual report (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program Specific I.A.1.NCHS data update (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific I.A.2.PSO data (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific I.A.NCHS initiative progress report (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific I.C.Transfer School Creation Report (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific I.F.1.Math project (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific II.A.SLC Initiative SAM proposal (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific II.B.SAM Year 2 report (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific III.A.FFTcurriculum template (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific III.B.FFT Application guidelines (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific III.C.FFT scoring rubric (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific III.D.Magi Fund for Teachers Report (2006) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific IV.A.college bound proposal (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific V.A.Libraries Proposal (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Program specific V.B.LMC21 summary of campuses (2007) (PDF).
• New Visions for Public Schools. Cause 4-NCHS Year 4 Evaluation (2007) (PDF).

What they do: Replications, Inc. identifies high-performing public middle schools (6th-8th grades) and high schools and "replicates" them as New York City public schools. The process includes placing the school's future principal in the "model school" for training. Replications, Inc. has started 24 schools in New York City. 19

Available evidence: Achievement test data shows that Replications students outperform students in nearby public schools. 20

Why we don't recommend this organization: Insufficient empirical case, due to concerns over selection bias with the data we do have. In the data we've seen, Replications students outperform students in nearby public schools from year one, and the gap does not appear to grow, suggesting that the difference may be one of students rather than one of schooling.

• Replications, Inc. Application response - Round 1 (2007) (PDF).
• Replications, Inc. Application response - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Application - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Evaluation of Replications' Schools: Comparison to Public District (2007) (PDF).
• Replications, Inc. Appendix A to Round 2 Application – Attendance Rates, Graduation Rates, and Regents Exam Performance (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Appendix B to Round 2 Application – Typical Middle School Testing Schedule (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Appendix C to Round 2 Application – Schools' Basic Information (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Publicly Available Test Data (2007) (XLS).
• Replications, Inc. Sources and Amounts of Foundation Support (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. General Information: Mission Statement, Number of Staff, and Relationships with Other Organizations (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. Staff bios (2007) (DOC).
• Replications, Inc. 2007-08 Expenditures and Budget Comparison (2007) (XLS).
• Replications, Inc. 2006-07 Expenditures (2007) (XLS).
• Replications, Inc. "Planning Year" Program Budget (2007) (XLS).
• Replications, Inc. 2006 Financial Audit (2006) (PDF).

What they do: St. Aloysius runs a school (pre-K through 8th grade) serving 300 students in Harlem. 21 Its program includes a mandatory summer academy for 5th-7th graders and after-school activities that are attended by the vast majority of students in all grades. 22

Available evidence: St. Aloysius students perform significantly better than students in district public schools on the New York State English Language Arts exam, although their performance on math exams is mixed. 23 St. Aloysius students have also graduated at a rate well above the city average (98% St. Aloysius over the last 15 years 24 - compared to 43% for NYC as a whole, according to a Manhattan Institute study ).

Why we don't recommend this organization: Insufficient empirical case, due to concerns over selection bias with the data we do have. St. Aloysius students pay an average of $2,400 in tuition; 25 the willingness to do so may indicate a combination of family income, family environment, motivation, etc. that makes it inappropriate to compare St. Aloysius students to NYC students in general, and difficult to put their performance in context.

• St. Aloysius. Application response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• St. Aloysius. Application response - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• St. Aloysius. Application - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• St. Aloysius. Application - Round 2, Email (2007) (HTML).
• St. Aloysius. Major Corporation and Foundation Support 2004-07 (2007) (XLS).
• St. Aloysius. 2006-07 Budget (2007) (XLS).
• St. Aloysius. 2007-08 Budget (2007) (XLS).
• St. Aloysius. 2004-05 Financial Audit (2005) (PDF).

What they do: Student Sponsor Partners funds approximately 400 high-school scholarships for disadvantaged rising ninth-graders, enabling them to attend one of 22 non-public "Partner Schools" in New York City. 26 SSP also provides each scholarship recipient with a Sponsor who meets with the student 4-6 times per year and pays a portion of the student's tuition. 27

Available evidence: SSP provided data illustrating that its students graduate high school and matriculate to college at rates that are 2-3 times those of the public schools in which SSP students would otherwise have been enrolled (based on SSP's range of graduation rates in their feeder schools found in Student Sponsor Partners 28 ) and almost twice the rate for their demographic groups in NYC. 29

Why we don't recommend this organization: Insufficient empirical case, due to concerns over selection bias with the data we do have. We feel that the feeder school graduation rate does not provide a reasonable comparison group, given that SSP's participants enter the program performing better than students attending feeder schools. SSP students are more likely to be at Level 4 (the highest performing level) and less likely to score at Level 1 (the lowest performing level) even before they enter the program. 30

• Student Sponsor Partners. Application response - Round 1 (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Application - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Application response - Round 2 (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Partner School Enrollment and Demographic Data (2007) (XLS).
• Student Sponsor Partners. SSP Scholarship Recipient (Deshaun Taylor) Speech (2006) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. “Save the Catholic Schools” – Sol Stern Article (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Attachment 2 to Round 2 Application – 2005 Sponsor Survey (2005) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Attachment 1 to Round 2 Application – SSP College Alumni Survey (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Sources of Income for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 (2007) (XLS).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Biographies for Key Staff (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. General Information: Mission Statement, Number of Staff, and Relationships with Other Organizations (2007) (DOC).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Most Recent Financial Statement (2007) (XLS).
• Student Sponsor Partners. Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 Budgets (2007) (XLS).

Achievement First, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 1.

• Achievement First, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pgs 9-10.
• Achievement First, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pgs 26-30.

Harlem Center for Education, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 1.

Harlem Center for Education, “2005-06 Annual Progress Report (2007),” Pg 6.

Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP), “2003-06 Evaluation of ALLL Pilot Program (2007),” Pg 2.

Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP), “2003-06 Evaluation of ALLL Pilot Program (2007),” Pgs 2-4.

Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP), “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 4.

Learning through an Expanded Arts Program (LEAP), “2007-08 Budget (2007).”

Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA). “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 1.

Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA), “1st LEDA Cohort's Performance Data (SAT, GPA etc.) And College Attended (No Names) (2007).”

Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA), “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 3.

See data from Leadership Enterprise for a Diverse America (LEDA), "Hispanic Initiative Evaluation (Liza's Study) (2007)."

New Visions for Public Schools, “Cause 4-NCHS Year 3 Evaluation (2007),” Pg 39-46.

New Visions for Public Schools, “Cause 4-NCHS Year 4 Evaluation (2007),” Pg 39-41.

See for example, this report on the Federal Smaller Learning Communities Program , starting at Pg 115.

Replications, Inc., “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 1.

See this chart of test scores using the data available at Replications, Inc, "Publicly Available Test Data (2007)."

St. Aloysius, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pg 1.

St. Aloysius, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pg 3.

St. Aloysius, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pg 6.

St. Aloysius, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pgs 6-7.

St. Aloysius, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pg 5.

Student Sponsor Partners, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 1.

• Student Sponsor Partners, “Application response - Round 1 (2007),” Pg 2.
• Student Sponsor Partners, “Application - Round 2 (2007),” Pg 4.

Student Sponsor Partners, “Application response - Round 2 (2007),” Pgs 2, 7.

• Why Kindful? Mission Testimonials Comparisons
• Features Fundraising Tools Donor Communications Donor Management Tracking & Reporting View All Features
• Apps & Integrations
• Resources Blog Webinars Kindful Academy eBooks Templates Year-End Giving Nonprofit Glossary Consultant Directory
• Year-End Giving
• Other Resources Academy eBooks Templates Webinars
• Nonprofit Glossary
• Join the Newsletter

Funding & Grant Resources For Nonprofits Focused On Education

Maddie Zeigler, M.Ed. • August 09, 2021

Foundations in the United States focus their funding priorities on many different issues. If your nonprofit is seeking funding, it’s critical to identify the foundations whose interests and funding priorities align with your own. To assist in the arduous grant research process, I’ve created this list of grant resources and funders according to a specific funding focus area: education. 

Education is one of the more popular issues that many foundations focus on. The educational goals for the funders in this list include increasing postsecondary and higher learning opportunities, advancing innovation inside the classroom, engaging more students in the arts, and enhancing early childhood development, just to name a few. These organizations are currently offering grant and funding opportunities and/or accepting letters of inquiry or project ideas. 

Grant research tip : As you look over the list and peruse potential funders, take notes of those who best align with your work. Utilize this helpful document to build a profile for all potential funders with relevant information and contact information. Visit Grantli to learn more about how I do my grant research and how your own organization can find more appropriate funders and funding opportunities.

Funding Priority: Education

Andrew w. mellon foundation, carnegie corporation of new york, global fund for children, international paper foundation, state street foundation, michael & susan dell foundation, the kresge foundation, charles stewart mott foundation, kars4kids foundation, lumina foundation, the nea foundation, willard & pat walker charitable foundation, daniels fund, the denver foundation, robert r. mccormick foundation, california community foundation, ewing marion kauffman foundation, the skillman foundation, oregon community foundation, arizona community foundation, baltimore community foundation, the boston foundation, lilly endowment inc..

The Andrew W. Mellon foundation seeks to build just communities enriched by meaning and empowered by critical thinking, where ideas and imagination can thrive. They work with colleges, universities, and other organizations that embrace equity in higher learning, with a focus on historically underserved populations, including nontraditional and incarcerated students. 

Areas served: Worldwide

The Carnegie Corporation of New York—established in 1911 by Andrew Carnegie to promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding—is one of America’s oldest grantmaking foundations. Their grantmaking aims to ensure that American public education prepares all students with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they need to fully participate in democracy and thrive in the global economy. Their educational focus areas include new designs to advance learning, pathways to postsecondary success, leadership and teaching to advance learning, public understanding, and integration, learning, and innovation.

The Global Fund For Children believes that educating children and youth is the key to building a more peaceful and just society. They currently partner with 48 local organizations in 17 countries that work to secure equal educational access and high-quality education for all children. They provide education tailored to girls’ needs. early childhood development programs, supplemental learning opportunities, and innovative educational programming for indigenous children, migrants, refugees, child laborers, and children with disabilities.

International Paper Foundation (IP) makes sustainable investments to “protect and improve the lives of our employees and mobilize our people, products, and resources to address critical needs in the communities where we live and work.” They support strategic partners that focus on helping children succeed via a comprehensive approach to education. Literacy, particularly from birth through 3rd grade, is their primary focus because reading skills form the foundation for all childhood learning.

Areas served: Worldwide ( only communities where IP has operations/employees)

State Street Foundation believes the most effective way to improve the overall well-being of our communities is to help disadvantaged individuals earn and make a living. By keeping a sharp focus on education and work, they hope to bring lasting economic benefits to communities worldwide.

The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation creates opportunities in education, health, and family economic stability for children and families living in urban poverty. Millions of children from low-income backgrounds don’t have the chance to attend a high-quality school. For those who do, unique challenges remain, making it harder for them to get to and through college. This foundation invests in closing these opportunity gaps so all students can pursue a quality education, providing a pathway to prosperity for them and their families.

Areas served: US, India, South Africa

The Kresge Foundation works to expand opportunities in America’s cities through grantmaking and social investing. They fund organizations and networks of institutions that prioritize improving the educational outcomes and experiences of the following students—people with low-incomes, especially those living in cities, and underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, including first-generation, Black, Latino, Asian-Pacific Islander, Native American, veterans, and immigrant students.

Areas served: US

The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation supports nonprofits that are working to strengthen their hometown of Flint, Michigan, and communities around the world. They make education grants to help all children (especially those in underserved communities) develop the knowledge, skills, and behaviors they need to succeed in college, career pathways, and life. 

Areas served: US (limited worldwide)

The Kars4Kids Small Grant Program is dedicated to supporting educational initiatives around the country, helping to impact more children. They accept submissions from any US-based, IRS-recognized nonprofit organizations focused on work that benefits America’s children. Grants typically range from $500-$2,000, depending on such factors as mission alignment and availability of funds.

The Lumina Foundation believes that education provides the basis for individual opportunity, economic vitality, and social stability. With its partners, Lumina works toward a goal of 60 percent of Americans with a college degree, workforce certificate, or other high-quality credential beyond high school by 2025.

The National Education Association Foundation is a national nonprofit and philanthropic organization based in Washington, DC. Founded by educators, their mission is to work in partnership with others to promote the absolute best in public education. They believe that the most innovative and effective policies and strategies emanate from educators engaged in authentic partnership with policymakers, students, parents, and others who are committed to educational equity, excellence, and opportunity.

The purpose of the Willard and Pat Walker Charitable Foundation is to support charitable, religious, scientific, literary, or educational endeavors, either directly or by contributions to organizations.

Areas served: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas

Robin Hood is New York City’s largest poverty-fighting organization. For over thirty years, they’ve been finding, fueling, and creating the most impactful and scalable solutions to lift families out of poverty in New York City. They partner with over 250 nonprofits to provide food, housing, education, legal services, workforce development, and more to New Yorkers living in poverty across all five boroughs.

Areas served: New York City

The Daniels Fund focuses on supporting highly effective and ethical nonprofit organizations that achieve significant results in the community. Their education funding priorities focus on early childhood education and K-12 education. 

Areas served: Colorado, Wyoming

The Denver Foundation’s first Community Grants cycle is now open to applications. Through the Community Grants Program, The Denver Foundation supports nonprofits that serve the seven-county Metro Denver area, advance constituent engagement and racial equity, and align with their priority funding areas (including education).

Areas served: Denver/Colorado

The Robert R. McCormick Foundation invests in organizations that demonstrate a commitment to creating value in education. The education program’s developmental target is the first eight years of life. They aim to build upon state efforts to develop a more seamless, well-functioning, and effective early childhood system. Their strategic focus of leaders, teachers, and families also incorporates support for one of the strongest early childhood policy and advocacy networks in the nation.

Areas served: Illinois

The California Community Foundation believes that the prosperity of Los Angeles County depends on a well-educated workforce and realizing the potential of future generations. They aim to address disparities in student achievement, college readiness, and college success for low-income, minority, and English-learner students, throughout the education pipeline, countywide.

Areas served: Los Angeles/California

The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation works with communities to build and support programs that boost entrepreneurship, improve education, and contribute to the vibrancy of Kansas City. The overall goal of the education strategy is that students of all ages in Kansas City are prepared for learning, work, and life after graduation, enabling them to be economically independent, contributing members of their communities. They focus on five main areas in service of their strategy: postsecondary, K-12, early childhood education, teachers and leaders, and community engagement.

Areas served: Kansas City/Missouri

Through grantmaking and relationship building, The Skillman Foundation leverages networks of champions who share a vision of equity in school and outside of it, where all kids have access to the support they need to thrive. By placing children at the center of this movement, their well-being becomes the focus of their collective work, and with it comes higher achieving students, highly engaged young people, and a brighter future for Detroit.

Areas served: Detroit/Michigan

The Oregon Community Foundation (OCF) has delivered three decades of proactive education investments and program development, along with advocacy, research, and strategic partnerships. OCF’s education programs, partnerships, and initiatives focus on early childhood, K-12, and access to postsecondary education and training where investments make the most impact.

Areas served: Oregon

The Arizona Community Foundation and its statewide affiliates harness the collective generosity of thousands of Arizonans. Funding is awarded year-round for a variety of uses, including general operating support, programmatic support, and capacity building. While most grants are made in Arizona, grants may be made nationally as well.

Areas served: Arizona (limited US)

The Baltimore Community Foundation is a philanthropic foundation created by and for the people of Greater Baltimore, where passionate people join together to make the region they love a better place, today and for future generations, with the long-term goals of strengthening schools and neighborhoods.

Areas served: Baltimore/Maryland

The Boston Foundation is the largest public charity and the largest grantmaker in New England. With an emphasis on education, they have a wish that all Greater Boston residents can access the education, training, and resources they will need to succeed in our regional economy, with an emphasis on early childhood, K-12, and college completion.

Areas served: Boston/Massachusetts

Lilly Endowment Inc.’s education grantmaking supports programs in Indiana on an invitational basis that promote high-quality early childhood education, strengthen K-12 education, prepare students for education and careers beyond high school, connect college students and graduates with meaningful employment opportunities in Indiana, enhance the effectiveness of Indiana colleges and universities to prepare their students for successful lives and careers, and build the state’s intellectual capital. If you believe your charitable organization has a request that fits within their guidelines, they suggest that you send them by regular mail a preliminary letter of no more than two pages. The letter should tell them about your organization, the project you have in mind, the issue or need you seek to address and the amount of support you will need from them.

Areas served: Indianapolis/Indiana

Schedule a live demo with our partner Bloomerang, and we’ll show you how easy it is to create and automate reports, utilize online and offline fundraising tools, quickly integrate and access all your data, and ultimately create more time to engage your donors.

Filed Under:    Insights

• Posts Archive
• SUFEO Chicago

How K-12 Students Can Profit Off of Non-Profits, by Jacob Morales

It is often said that it takes a village to raise a child. Raising and educating children is not an easy task, especially in “villages” where resources for youth are comparatively scarce. To remedy such shortages, students have looked to tools beyond their families and schools to achieve personal success. In this way, non-profit organizations have long supported students through mom

Photo from Pexels .

ents such as high school graduation and applying for college.

There are about 1.8 million registered non-profit organizations in the US, many of which provide resources directed at students. To prevent students from having to seek out these organizations on their own, school districts should facilitate this process by forming meaningful partnerships with non-profit organizations.

How education non-profits can be an asset to school systems

In many ways, education non-profit organizations step in to fill the gaps that schools experience. Each organization targets unique areas of education by providing resources relating to tutoring, college access, after-school programming, and mental health services. Some of the most prominent organizations doing this work include City Year, AmeriCorps, and Khan Academy. These groups have a successful track record of bringing free resources to students who need them most.

Other organizations add value to school systems on the back end. For example, The New Teacher’s Project (TNTP) partnered with the New York City Department of Education to recruit thousands of teachers in response to a shortage of qualified educators that disproportionately affected students of color in 2000. As reflected here, schools do not always have the means to solve problems on their own. This is where non-profits can be of assistance to the education system.

The relevance of non-profits was amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Schools transitioning to remote learning presented the field of education with unforeseeable challenges. Some of these obstacles included leaving low-income students without access to school meals and the necessary technology to attend class virtually. As expected, non-profits acted promptly to address these disparities.

Donating over 5,000 computers to students in need, Bridging Tech provided students with access to technology. These types of interventions are especially beneficial to Black and Hispanic students who are more likely to lack the necessary tools for remote learning. There will always be a demand for these kinds of resources that address educational disparities. Moving forward, schools should consider ways they can make the most of organizations that make it their mission to support students.

Even students can recognize the role that non-profits play in propelling their education forward. For example, Breakthrough Central Texas is an organization that seeks to create more first-generation college graduates. Breakthrough provides tutoring, mentoring, and advising that follow participants from middle school to college. Participants know better than anyone how these comprehensive programs have academically empowered them, especially during the pandemic. One college graduate notes, “Breakthrough played an integral role in making sure I stayed on track to achieve my college dreams.”

Ways to leverage non-profit resources through formal partnerships

The idea of partnerships between school systems and non-profit organizations is not a new one. In fact, many organizations rely on formal partnerships with school districts as a vehicle to provide their services. For example, PENCIL operates on a model that connects schools with business professionals that mentor students, providing them with resources to successfully meet their career goals. In PENCIL’s three-year retrospective review , the organization finds that this program provides students with meaningful networking opportunities and recommends that these school partnerships be scaled and expanded in New York City.

Examples such as this one raise the question of how other school districts can establish similar connections with local organizations. In 2016, the St. Louis Public Schools Foundation published the Guide for Effective School & Community Partnerships . This guide, directed towards the St. Louis school system, provides resources for schools to select, form, and evaluate partnerships with educational non-profits. Specifically, the guide provides tools to help schools form contractual relationships with relevant organizations through a form called a “memorandum of understanding” (See page 9 of the guide). These contracts officially recognize the partnership, define the obligations of both parties, and provide standards to measure performance. The benefit of forming an agreement with a local organization is that it helps schools select partners that are meaningful and tailored to a school’s specific needs.

Schools can act now to build relationships with community organizations

Every school district has areas for improvement that cannot always be resolved internally. Looking to community assets can be one way that schools can counteract shortcomings. There is also more to gain from non-profit partnerships than just resources. These connections can allow students to identify as a part of a larger community. Schools that have prioritized community education have seen improvements across all domains of development.

Although helpful, it is not necessary that all partnerships between schools and external groups result in a contractual agreement. Instead, schools can develop less formal relationships by providing physical spaces for non-profit events or sending emails to parents about available resources. Schools are in the best position to identify the specific needs of every child and should address them by exhausting all available tools. In looking to the surrounding community for support, schools will expand their networks and effectively prepare students for their next stage in life.

Jacob Morales is a student at Loyola University Chicago School of Law and wrote this blog as a part of the Education Law and Policy course.

Comments are closed.

Education Law and Policy Institute Blog

Search our blog, newsletter signup.

Affiliation:

Email address:

• anti-racism
• critical race theory
• Educational equity
• Educational policy
• Federal intervention
• First Amendment
• foster youth
• humanities education
• implicit bias training
• Institute Updates and Activities
• mask mandates
• public education
• remote learning
• school curriculum
• school discipline
• School Partnerships
• School policing
• Section 504
• special education
• teacher training
• Uncategorized

Increasing the Number of Students Pursuing STEM Careers

< RETURN To K-12 STEM EDUCATION

RETURN To K-12 STEM EDUCATION

K-12 Education Grants

Applications are closed and will open fall 2024.

INL cultivates Idaho’s education landscape by leveraging partnerships and resources to grow science, technology, engineering and math opportunities for all. The program seeks to align future workforce needs with STEM education in Idaho.

Applicants must be able to provide proof of 501(c)(3) nonprofit status and a W-9 form. A review of grant impact will be required.

A panel of judges will evaluate each application independently to competitively award grants.

Funding for INL’s STEM grants is provided by Battelle Energy Alliance. Over the past decade, INL has awarded nearly $5 million in STEM grants to support STEM education in Idaho.  Read more about winners of past INL grants.

Applications are accepted for science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education grants to support K-12 STEM education in Idaho in the following categories:

INL STEM IMPACT/GOV. C.L. “BUTCH” AND FIRST LADY LORI OTTER GRANT

One $15,000 STEM Impact Grant, named in recognition of the legacy of STEM education support in Idaho by the former governor and first lady, will be presented to a team of educators. Partnering with community, business or industry is encouraged.

The grant provides full or partial support for an innovative, collaborative and sustainable STEM project that integrates STEM concepts into a school and has a demonstrable impact on Idaho students.

This grant can be used to fund training, materials and supplies, educator stipends, or other resources related to completion of the project.

A recipient will be chosen on the basis of the overall impact of their proposed project and its alignment with grant requirements. View the  INL STEM Impact Grant Scoring Rubric .

CLASSROOM GRANT

Maximum of $2,000 per award.

K-12 Classroom Grants are available for Idaho teachers and administrators to improve student understanding of and learning experiences in STEM. This grant seeks proposals that support innovative student-centered projects and experiential learning in the classroom. Grant requests vary, with a maximum award of $2,000. The funding should be used to cover project materials and equipment.

FAMILY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT GRANT

Maximum of $750 per award.

Family and Community Engagement Grants are designed to support publicly funded and nonprofit organizations. Up to $750 is available to selected applicants wishing to host a community event focused on raising awareness about STEM education and career options. The event could focus specifically on math or science, or it could celebrate STEM in general.

Eligibility includes publicly funded educational organizations such as schools, libraries, after-school educational programs or educational nonprofits/community centers.

STEM EQUITY GRANT

Maximum of $1,000 per award.

STEM Equity Grants are designed to support programs that serve underrepresented populations of pre-K-12 students. Both formal and informal educators serving historically underrepresented students in STEM education and careers are eligible for this award. Grant requests vary, with a maximum award of $1,000. Targeted groups include girls, rural and remote students, racial ethnic minority students, and economically disadvantaged students in Idaho.

INNOVATION IN STEM REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS 

Maximum of $30,000 per award.

Innovation in STEM Requests for Proposals are designed to support STEM organizations, universities and other educational institutions. Up to $30,000 is available for projects that are aligned to INL’s mission, K-12 education program goals, and workforce development needs. INL values diversity, equity and inclusion, and special consideration is given to proposals addressing these values.

Each proposal or project should be submitted and will be considered separately, even if more than one proposal originates from the same organization.

• Contact Information

Adrienne Petrovic

Battelle Energy Alliance manages INL for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy

• DOE Office of Nuclear Energy
• DOE Idaho Operations Office

Idaho National Laboratory 1955 N. Fremont Ave. Idaho Falls, ID 83415 866-495-7440

• Equal Opportunity Employer
• Privacy and Accessibility
• Vulnerability Disclosure Program

RESEARCH AREAS

• Nuclear Energy
• Integrated Energy
• National & Homeland Security
• Environment, Safety, Health
• Contact Info
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Bus Operations

PARTNERSHIPS

• Research Excellence Programs
• Center for Advanced Energy Studies (CAES)
• User Facilities
• Community & Education Outreach
• Economic & Workforce Development
• Initiating Business with INL
• Fact Sheets

Copyright © 2024 Idaho National Laboratory

• Mission, Vision and Leadership
• Science & Technology Overview
• Laboratory Directed Research and Development
• The Top 20 Questions About Idaho National Laboratory
• BUS OPERATIONS
• EBR-I Atomic Museum
• ENVIRONMENTAL
• Environmental Policy
• Sustainable INL
• Cultural Resources
• Annual Site Environmental Report
• National Security
• LICENSING & PARTNERSHIPS
• Licensing Process
• Ways to Do Business with INL
• Guide: Partner with DOE Labs
• PROSPECTIVE SUPPLIERS
• Small Business Program
• Procurement Opportunities
• Vendor Portal
• COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
• Community Grants
• Community Volunteerism
• Request A Speaker
• ECONOMIC & WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
• K-12 STEM EDUCATION
• K-12 STEM Education Grants
• Resource Library
• Explore STEM Careers
• Interactive Periodic Table of Elements
• Community Outreach
• National & Homeland Security
• Inclusion and Diversity
• News Archives
• VIEW ALL JOBS
• Internships
• Joint Appointments
• Postdoctoral Positions
• INCLUSION & DIVERSITY
• EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

Processing, please wait…

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Partisan divides over K-12 education in 8 charts

K-12 education is shaping up to be a key issue in the 2024 election cycle. Several prominent Republican leaders, including GOP presidential candidates, have sought to limit discussion of gender identity and race in schools , while the Biden administration has called for expanded protections for transgender students . The coronavirus pandemic also brought out partisan divides on many issues related to K-12 schools .

Today, the public is sharply divided along partisan lines on topics ranging from what should be taught in schools to how much influence parents should have over the curriculum. Here are eight charts that highlight partisan differences over K-12 education, based on recent surveys by Pew Research Center and external data.

Pew Research Center conducted this analysis to provide a snapshot of partisan divides in K-12 education in the run-up to the 2024 election. The analysis is based on data from various Center surveys and analyses conducted from 2021 to 2023, as well as survey data from Education Next, a research journal about education policy. Links to the methodology and questions for each survey or analysis can be found in the text of this analysis.

Most Democrats say K-12 schools are having a positive effect on the country , but a majority of Republicans say schools are having a negative effect, according to a Pew Research Center survey from October 2022. About seven-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (72%) said K-12 public schools were having a positive effect on the way things were going in the United States. About six-in-ten Republicans and GOP leaners (61%) said K-12 schools were having a negative effect.

About six-in-ten Democrats (62%) have a favorable opinion of the U.S. Department of Education , while a similar share of Republicans (65%) see it negatively, according to a March 2023 survey by the Center. Democrats and Republicans were more divided over the Department of Education than most of the other 15 federal departments and agencies the Center asked about.

In May 2023, after the survey was conducted, Republican lawmakers scrutinized the Department of Education’s priorities during a House Committee on Education and the Workforce hearing. The lawmakers pressed U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona on topics including transgender students’ participation in sports and how race-related concepts are taught in schools, while Democratic lawmakers focused on school shootings.

Partisan opinions of K-12 principals have become more divided. In a December 2021 Center survey, about three-quarters of Democrats (76%) expressed a great deal or fair amount of confidence in K-12 principals to act in the best interests of the public. A much smaller share of Republicans (52%) said the same. And nearly half of Republicans (47%) had not too much or no confidence at all in principals, compared with about a quarter of Democrats (24%).

This divide grew between April 2020 and December 2021. While confidence in K-12 principals declined significantly among people in both parties during that span, it fell by 27 percentage points among Republicans, compared with an 11-point decline among Democrats.

Democrats are much more likely than Republicans to say teachers’ unions are having a positive effect on schools. In a May 2022 survey by Education Next , 60% of Democrats said this, compared with 22% of Republicans. Meanwhile, 53% of Republicans and 17% of Democrats said that teachers’ unions were having a negative effect on schools. (In this survey, too, Democrats and Republicans include independents who lean toward each party.)

The 38-point difference between Democrats and Republicans on this question was the widest since Education Next first asked it in 2013. However, the gap has exceeded 30 points in four of the last five years for which data is available.

Republican and Democratic parents differ over how much influence they think governments, school boards and others should have on what K-12 schools teach. About half of Republican parents of K-12 students (52%) said in a fall 2022 Center survey that the federal government has too much influence on what their local public schools are teaching, compared with two-in-ten Democratic parents. Republican K-12 parents were also significantly more likely than their Democratic counterparts to say their state government (41% vs. 28%) and their local school board (30% vs. 17%) have too much influence.

On the other hand, more than four-in-ten Republican parents (44%) said parents themselves don’t have enough influence on what their local K-12 schools teach, compared with roughly a quarter of Democratic parents (23%). A larger share of Democratic parents – about a third (35%) – said teachers don’t have enough influence on what their local schools teach, compared with a quarter of Republican parents who held this view.

Republican and Democratic parents don’t agree on what their children should learn in school about certain topics. Take slavery, for example: While about nine-in-ten parents of K-12 students overall agreed in the fall 2022 survey that their children should learn about it in school, they differed by party over the specifics. About two-thirds of Republican K-12 parents said they would prefer that their children learn that slavery is part of American history but does not affect the position of Black people in American society today. On the other hand, 70% of Democratic parents said they would prefer for their children to learn that the legacy of slavery still affects the position of Black people in American society today.

Parents are also divided along partisan lines on the topics of gender identity, sex education and America’s position relative to other countries. Notably, 46% of Republican K-12 parents said their children should not learn about gender identity at all in school, compared with 28% of Democratic parents. Those shares were much larger than the shares of Republican and Democratic parents who said that their children should not learn about the other two topics in school.

Many Republican parents see a place for religion in public schools , whereas a majority of Democratic parents do not. About six-in-ten Republican parents of K-12 students (59%) said in the same survey that public school teachers should be allowed to lead students in Christian prayers, including 29% who said this should be the case even if prayers from other religions are not offered. In contrast, 63% of Democratic parents said that public school teachers should not be allowed to lead students in any type of prayers.

In June 2022, before the Center conducted the survey, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a football coach at a public high school who had prayed with players at midfield after games. More recently, Texas lawmakers introduced several bills in the 2023 legislative session that would expand the role of religion in K-12 public schools in the state. Those proposals included a bill that would require the Ten Commandments to be displayed in every classroom, a bill that would allow schools to replace guidance counselors with chaplains, and a bill that would allow districts to mandate time during the school day for staff and students to pray and study religious materials.

Mentions of diversity, social-emotional learning and related topics in school mission statements are more common in Democratic areas than in Republican areas. K-12 mission statements from public schools in areas where the majority of residents voted Democratic in the 2020 general election are at least twice as likely as those in Republican-voting areas to include the words “diversity,” “equity” or “inclusion,” according to an April 2023 Pew Research Center analysis .

Also, about a third of mission statements in Democratic-voting areas (34%) use the word “social,” compared with a quarter of those in Republican-voting areas, and a similar gap exists for the word “emotional.” Like diversity, equity and inclusion, social-emotional learning is a contentious issue between Democrats and Republicans, even though most K-12 parents think it’s important for their children’s schools to teach these skills . Supporters argue that social-emotional learning helps address mental health needs and student well-being, but some critics consider it emotional manipulation and want it banned.

In contrast, there are broad similarities in school mission statements outside of these hot-button topics. Similar shares of mission statements in Democratic and Republican areas mention students’ future readiness, parent and community involvement, and providing a safe and healthy educational environment for students.

• Education & Politics
• Partisanship & Issues
• Politics & Policy

Jenn Hatfield is a writer/editor at Pew Research Center

Most Americans think U.S. K-12 STEM education isn’t above average, but test results paint a mixed picture

About 1 in 4 u.s. teachers say their school went into a gun-related lockdown in the last school year, about half of americans say public k-12 education is going in the wrong direction, what public k-12 teachers want americans to know about teaching, what’s it like to be a teacher in america today, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

What's in Iowa's $8.9 billion state budget for the coming year? We break it down:

Changes to special education funding, a pay bump for judges and money for state park maintenance — just a few of the items tucked into Iowa's $8.91 billion budget for the coming year.

Iowa lawmakers passed the state budget just before adjourning the 2024 legislative session April 20 and heading home for the year.

The spending marks an increase of 4.2%, or $361 million, over last year’s spending of $8.55 billion .

Still, lawmakers budgeted far below what they could have.

This year, the Republican-controlled Legislature is spending just 79.8% of Iowa's $11.16 billion in available revenue, leaving $2.25 billion unspent. Iowa is projected to end the coming fiscal year with a $2.41 billion surplus, $929.9 million in reserve funds and $3.76 billion in the state’s Taxpayer Relief Fund.

By law, the state can spend up to 99% of ongoing revenue.

More: All-night marathon caps Iowa Legislature's 2024 session. What's changing: AEAs, your taxes

This year’s budget funds several notable items, including $10 million for a new Division of Special Education within the Iowa Department of Education that will assume oversight duties over special education services currently performed by Iowa’s Area Education Agencies.

Over the course of negotiations, lawmakers proposed several prominent line items that didn’t make it into the final budget. Left by the wayside were a potential pay raise for lawmakers and statewide elected officials and changes to the state’s district judicial nominating commissions that would have allowed the governor to appoint a majority of the commissions' members.

Gov. Kim Reynolds has yet to sign the new budgets. She has the power to veto specific line items included in budget bills.

More: Our look at the biggest bills that passed and failed in the Iowa Legislature's 2024 session

Here’s a look at what’s in the state budget.

Click to go to the specific spending that interests you:

Standing appropriations | Health and Human Services | Education | Justice system | Transportation | Infrastructure | Judicial branch | Agriculture and natural resources | Administration and regulation | Economic development

Standing appropriations, including K-12 education funding

General fund: $4.61 billion ($201.7 million increase)

What it funds: Senate File 2443 funds the state’s annual standing appropriations, including $3.78 billion in state aid for K-12 public schools and $179.2 million for Iowa’s private school education savings accounts.

Cuts to AEA budget: Lawmakers approved a $32.5 million cut to the budget for the state’s Area Education Agencies. That includes a $7.5 million cut required by law and $10 million to fund a new Division of Special Education within the Iowa Department of Education.

Lawmakers said they are using $14 million to raise pay for paraeducators and other non-salaried school staff. The final $1 million returns to the state’s general fund.

Paraeducator pay increase: The $14 million to raise pay for paraeducators and other non-salaried school staff was part of a deal struck in House File 2612 , which overhauled the AEAs and raised teacher salaries.

Money for Iowa’s education savings accounts: The state plans to spend $179.2 million on education savings accounts, which families can use to pay private school costs. That’s a $51.3 million increase over what the state is spending on the program this year. Families approved for accounts will receive $7,826 per student.

The nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency expects about 6,100 additional students to use education savings accounts in the coming year, which it predicts would bring total enrollment in the program to 22,900 students.

Immigration enforcement: The budget also includes $2 million in new money for the Department of Public Safety to fund 12 positions "to address the rise in illegal immigration and related criminal conduct such as drug trafficking and human trafficking."

Health and Human Services

General fund: $2.21 billion ($88.6 million increase)

Other funds: $468.5 million ($360,000 increase)

What it funds: House File 2698 funds the Department of Health and Human Services, which includes the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Thrive Iowa: The budget allows HHS to spend up to $8 million on “Thrive Iowa,” a new program Reynolds announced in her Condition of the State address that will use state navigators to refer Iowans to services from private providers, including churches and nonprofits. The program is modeled after Hope Florida , a similar program that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis put in place.

Traveling nurse regulations: The bill places new regulations on staffing agencies for temporary nursing services. Agencies would be required to register with the Department of Inspections, Licenses and Appeals or face being banned from contracting with health care providers in Iowa. The department would be required to create a new system for the public to file complaints about temporary nursing staffers.

Temporary staffing agencies would be required to maintain liability insurance coverage and meet all state licensing and certification requirements. They would be barred from using noncompete clauses for workers.

Staffing agencies would be required to submit quarterly reports to the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services listing the average amounts they charge to the health care providers they contract with, and the average pay each type of temporary health care worker receives.

Nursing home trainings: The state’s Department of Inspections, Licensing and Appeals is required to provide semi-annual training for nursing homes and nursing home inspectors covering at least three of the 10 most common citations issued during the preceding year.

General fund: $1.02 billion ($35.4 million increase)

Other funds: $34 million (no change)

What it funds: Senate File 2435 funds operations and staffing for Iowa’s Department of Education, Department for the Blind and the universities governed by the Board of Regents.

Division of Special Education: The budget allocates $10 million to fund a new Division of Special Education created within the Iowa Department of Education as part of Reynolds’ bill overhauling the AEAs. The division is authorized to hire up to 62 positions responsible for overseeing the special education services provided by the AEAs. Its funding will come from money previously allocated to the AEAs.

DEI restrictions on campus: Language in the budget prohibits the University of Iowa, Iowa State University and the University of Northern Iowa from establishing, maintaining or assigning employees for diversity, equity and inclusion operations, as well as compelling or requiring DEI statements from anyone. The ban excludes positions solely focused on compliance with state and federal law.

The language codifies existing directives the Iowa Board of Regents adopted last fall.

2.5% funding increase for public universities: The University of Iowa, Iowa State University and the University of Northern Iowa see a 2.5% funding increase through this budget, about $12.3 million, bringing total state general aid funding for the Board of Regents to $573 million.

The state’s community colleges receive a 3% funding increase, or $7 million, bringing their total state general aid funding to $236 million.

Open enrollment deadline for schools: Iowa parents will face a March 1 deadline to let schools know if they plan to open-enroll their student in another school district. The deadline contains exceptions for good cause. The language in the budget reverses a law passed just two years ago that removed the deadline.

Chronic student absences: The budget includes language setting new rules for schools governing when students must be considered chronically absent. It requires schools to meet with students and parents if a student has missed 15% of school days and to create an absenteeism prevention plan.

Violating the terms of the plan would be considered a misdemeanor public offense, punishable by a fine, jail time or community service.

Justice system

General fund: $693.3 million ($24 million increase)

Other funds: $19.5 million (no change)

What it funds: House File 2693 funds the Iowa Department of Corrections, Department of Justice, Department of Public Safety, Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, Office of the State Public Defender, the Board of Parole and the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy.

Higher salaries for starting corrections officers: The budget includes a $11.9 million increase for the Department of Corrections that will allow the department to hire new corrections officers at a starting salary of $24 per hour. The department will be required to send a report to lawmakers by Dec. 15 detailing how the higher starting pay affects the overall salary scale for current state prison employees.

Raises for court-appointed attorneys: Pay for court-appointed attorneys is going up by $3 per hour. It’s the third year in a row that lawmakers have raised pay for indigent defense attorneys, who represent low-income Iowans.

The new pay rates will be $86 per hour for class A felonies, $81 per hour for class B felonies and $76 per hour for all other cases.

Boost for attorney general’s office: Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird will receive a $2.8 million budget increase, allowing her office to hire six new full-time employees.

Transportation

General fund: $0

Other funds: $453.1 million ($1.8 million decrease)

What it funds: Senate File 2422 funds the Department of Transportation and transportation-related infrastructure. The department is funded through the state’s Road Use Tax Fund and Primary Road Fund.

Infrastructure

Other funds: $222.4 million

What it funds: House File 2691 funds major maintenance, repairs and improvements to infrastructure projects across the state, as well as renewable fuel infrastructure incentives, tourism efforts and more. The money comes from Iowa's Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and Technology Reinvestment Fund.

State park maintenance: The budget spends $6 million on maintenance of Iowa's state park system, including $1 million in one-time money for projects to increase accessibility to the parks for people with disabilities.

Iowa judicial branch

General fund: $220.2 million ($7.7 million increase)

Other funds: $0

What it funds: Senate File 2436 funds Iowa’s judicial branch.

Pay bump for judges: Lawmakers included $2.4 million for a 5% pay increase for all judges and magistrates, fulfilling a request from Iowa Supreme Court Chief Justice Susan Christensen to compete with neighboring states’ salaries for judges. A lobbyist for the Iowa Judicial Branch told lawmakers Iowa will still be “dead last” in judicial salaries compared to surrounding states, even with the raise.

The budget also includes changes to Iowa’s judicial pension system that will result in the state picking up a higher percentage of the contributions, while lessening the amount judges need to put in.

Agriculture and natural resources

General fund: $46 million ($2.4 million increase)

Other funds: $97.1 million ($646,000 increase)

What it funds: Senate File 2421 funds the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.

Food assistance pilot program : $200,000 will go toward the launch of a pilot program that helps schools and food banks purchase locally sourced foods through the Choose Iowa initiative.

State park maintenance : The budget spends $1 million on state park maintenance, repair and refurbishment and another $296,228 on improving state parks' accessibility for people with disabilities.

Aquifer mapping: The Iowa Geological Survey will receive $250,000 to map and assess the conditions of the state's underground aquifers, including measuring the volume of groundwater available in Iowa, how quickly it replenishes and models for budgeting Iowa's water supply in the future.

Administration and regulation

General fund: $71.6 million ($1.1 million increase)

Other funds: $67.1 million ($246,000 increase)

What it funds: Senate File 2433 funds several of Iowa's statewide elected offices: the governor, the state auditor, the secretary of state and the state treasurer, plus their employees.

And it funds several administrative and regulatory agencies, including the Department of Administrative Services, the Department of Inspections, Appeals and Licensing, the Department of Management, the Department of Revenue, the Department of Insurance and Financial Services, the Iowa Utilities Board, the Iowa Public Information Board, the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board and the Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS).

Election training for county officials: A $445,000 funding increase for Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate will fund a team to train county auditors and office staff in election administration and compliance. Pate had asked for the money to help train poll workers around the state.

Another $50,000 will go toward creating a pilot program for the secretary of state to identify ineligible voters. Iowa was one of a number of states last year that left the Electronic Registration Information Center , a multistate organization aimed at helping states improve the accuracy of their voter rolls.

Economic development

General fund: $42 million ($184,000 increase)

Other funds: $34.4 million (no change)

What it funds: Senate File 2432 funds the Iowa Economic Development Authority, the Iowa Finance Authority, the Public Employment Relations Board, the Iowa Department of Workforce Development and the Iowa Board of Regents.

Automation in manufacturing: The budget sets out $2 million for the Iowa Manufacturing 4.0 program, which aims to implement automation technologies such as advanced robotics, augmented reality and cybersecurity.

Stephen Gruber-Miller covers the Iowa Statehouse and politics for the Register. He can be reached by email at  [email protected]  or by phone at 515-284-8169. Follow him on Twitter at  @sgrubermiller .

Galen Bacharier covers politics for the Register. Reach him at  [email protected] m   or (573) 219-7440, and follow him on Twitter @galenbacharier .

MS lawmakers revive bills to fund K-12 education, reform state retirement system

With only nine days left in the legislative session, Mississippi Senate and House lawmakers voted Friday to move forward revived legislation dealing with K-12 education funding, and a bill to reform contribution rates within the state retirement system.

On Thursday, the Senate introduced a suspension resolution that allowed the chamber to consider legislation that had previously been killed by legislative deadlines. The also passed that resolution Friday morning, allowing members of each chamber to work together on previously divisive legislation.

Earlier this year, the House and Senate both killed and revived legislation to rewrite the Mississippi Adequate Education Program with a new funding formula for K-12 education. The Senate also reintroduced efforts to change how the Public Employment Retirement System of Mississippi board makes changes to employer contribution rates into the state retirement system.

Here is what lawmakers did Friday, and what they will likely continue working on through the next few days as the session comes to a close.

House passes third attempt to K-12 education rewrite

House members took a third swipe at passing a new funding model for K-12 education by passing House Bill 4130, dubbed the Mississippi Student Funding Formula, or MSFF.

House Education Chairman Rob Roberson, R-Starkville, told the Clarion Ledger that he and his colleagues had been hammering out a final agreement on how to fund education with Senate leadership for the last two week.

"Hopefully it's the third time's the charm," Roberson said. "I think that that every time we've gone back and revisited, it's gotten a little better, it's gotten a little tighter in terms of what we're trying to accomplish. I certainly wouldn't want to throw shade on anything with the Senate, they brought out some good points, and honestly, in the long run, it makes the bill better."

Previously, the House and Senate had passed competing versions of education funding, with the Senate funding $2.94 billion through MAEP and the House passing the INSPIRE Act, which funded $3.001 billion, added weights to school district funding for specific needs and replaced MAEP's objective funding formula with a committee of education professionals to recommend funding changes in the future.

However, neither side could agree to fund the other's proposal, and House lawmakers were even prepared to hold off funding schools until the Senate agreed to negotiate the House proposal.

Read more about education struggle MS lawmakers still can't agree how to fund K-12 education. House reintroduces its own plan

The new bill includes an objective formula that is based around a base student cost of $6,695, which is $45 more per student than the INSPIRE Act. The SBC is factored from student enrollment and average teacher salaries.

However, the bill does account for funding shortfalls in districts that have declining populations. To address that concern and give school districts an opportunity to grow, for the first three years of the new program, no district will receive less funding than it did in FY 2024, which ends June 30.

The bill now heads over to the Senate, where it is likely to receive a warm welcome from both Senate leadership that helped draft HB 4130 and others.

"In the past several years, we have seen our schools and students achieve so much," Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann said after the bill passed through the House. "The Legislature has significantly raised teacher pay, addressed teacher workforce shortages, and increased funding for early education. The Senate’s past work on school funding and the compromise proposal we will hopefully pass this year is the next logical step."

Senate passes PERS legislation

Before the House dealt with K-12 education funding, the Senate passed Senate Bill 3231, which made changes to an employer contribution rate within PERS that is set to begin in July.

After more than an hour of debate, Senate lawmakers voted to approve freezing a 2% employer contribution rate increase, taking it from 17.7% to 19.7%.

Instead, the rate will increase by 0.5% every year for four years beginning in July. The bill would also require the PERS board to make contribution rate recommendations to the legislature accompanied by two financial reports backing up why the increase might be necessary. The legislature would then vote on any rate increases.

Before the vote, Sen. David Parker, R-Olive Branch, who also presented the bill, mentioned that shortfalls in funding that the rate increase would have addressed could be solved by a $100 million cash infusion from the legislature within the coming days.

There were previously two other attempts to change the contribution increase on public employers and also to replace elected board members with state appointees. Those bills both died by legislative deadlines.

What comes next?

Lawmakers have until Saturday night to file revenue bill conference reports detailing key funding measures and until Monday for general bills. Key pieces of legislation still to be decided include the education formula, changes to the state retirement system and Medicaid expansion.

There are nine days left in the 2024 session.

Mississippi Today

Pulitzer Prize-winning Nonprofit News

Lawmakers send MAEP education funding formula rewrite to governor

Share this:

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

A new school funding formula has been approved by the Legislature that, like the long-standing Mississippi Adequate Education Program, will rely on an objective mechanism to determine how much state funding is needed to operate schools.

The push to replace MAEP has been one of most contentious issues facing legislators in the final days of the 2024 session. There have been efforts for years to replace the formula by those who say the state could not afford it.

On Saturday the 52-member Senate with three dissenting votes passed on to the governor a compromise proposal to replace MAEP. The House had unanimously passed it late Friday.

“The whole point of us doing this is to make certain our school districts are treated as fairly and as best we could,” said House Education Chair Rob Roberson, R-Starkville. He said the new formula will provide additional money for poor districts and for low-income and special-needs students.

Roberson’s original bill did not include an objective funding formula, which had been the hallmark of MAEP. Senate Education Chairman Dennis DeBar, R-Leakesville, who was reluctant to rewrite MAEP, finally acquiesced, but was insistent that any rewrite include an objective formula that took out of the hands of politicians – namely legislators – the amount of money needed for the operation of local school districts.

On Saturday, DeBar told senators that if the Senate had not insisted on an objective funding formula, the Legislature could have “willy nilly” decided the level of education funding.

“This formula will allow for predictability over time. Whereas the House bill did not,” DeBar said. “It (the House plan) was a one-year thing where the Legislature could come in and decide to increase or decrease funding for education. This will hold our feet to the fire in the Legislature and ensure our schools are funded.”

House Education Vice Chairman Kent McCarty, R-Hattiesburg, told House members that the objective funding formula made the original House proposal stronger.

“I think this is a good addition to the bill,” he said. Like MAEP, the formula will be recalculated every four years and in the intervening years there will be an inflation factor added to the funding.

Under the new formula, schools will receive per student the average teacher salary divided by 14, which represents the average student-teacher statewide ratio. In addition schools will get another 20% of that amount for administrative costs, 30% for ancillary costs and money for operations and maintenance based on the three-year, per-square-foot average of the school district’s operations and maintenance costs.

On top of that, the school districts will receive additional funds for students in certain categories, such as for special-education students, those living in poverty, or living in areas of high poverty and for students who do not speak English as their primary language. The additional money provided to categories of students was a key component of the original House bill.

Like MAEP, local school districts will be required to pay a portion of the cost. But wealthier districts will be required to pay more than districts with a smaller local property tax base. No district will be mandated to pay more than 27% of the cost.

While Bryan said there appeared to be good features to the new funding plan, more time was needed to study it.

“It is simply not possible to enact a funding formula for public education in this legislative session where we know what we are doing,” he said. “We don’t have enough time for people to look at the new proposal, consider alternatives.”

Bryan pointed out that if MAEP was unpredictable for school districts it was because of the Legislature’s refusal to fully fund it. He said it is possible – even likely – that the same will occur with the new formula.

MAEP had language saying the formula “shall” be fully funded, But the full funding mandate was ignored every year since the program was fully enacted in 2003 except for twice.

Under the first year of the new formula, which goes into effect with the beginning of the new fiscal year on July 1, K-12 education is supposed to receive an additional $230 million.

The additional funding will bring the education budget to $2.94 billion – about $50 million less than MAEP would have provided if fully funded.

DeBar said that based on inflation it will take about $50 million more in funds to fully fund the new formula next year.

Sen. Angela Hill, R-Picayune, voted against the proposal because she feared that like MAEP the new formula would make a commitment over time the state could not afford. Plus, she said she was concerned about the money going to educate students who spoke English as a second language. Hill said she wanted more details on that feature of the bill.

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

• Look for the "Republish This Story" button underneath each story. To republish online, simply click the button, copy the html code and paste into your Content Management System (CMS).
• Editorial cartoons and photo essays are not included under the Creative Commons license and therefore do not have the "Republish This Story" button option. To learn more about our cartoon syndication services, click here .
• You can’t edit our stories, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style.
• You can’t sell or syndicate our stories.
• Any web site our stories appear on must include a contact for your organization.
• If you share our stories on social media, please tag us in your posts using @MSTODAYnews on Facebook and @MSTODAYnews on Twitter.
• You have to credit Mississippi Today. We prefer “Author Name, Mississippi Today” in the byline. If you’re not able to add the byline, please include a line at the top of the story that reads: “This story was originally published by Mississippi Today” and include our website, mississippitoday.org .
• You cannot republish our editorial cartoons, photographs, illustrations or graphics without specific permission (contact our managing editor Michael Guidry for more information). To learn more about our cartoon syndication services, click here .
• Our stories may appear on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories.
• You can only publish select stories individually — not as a collection.

by Bobby Harrison, Mississippi Today April 27, 2024

This <a target="_blank" href="https://mississippitoday.org/2024/04/27/maep-rewrite-repealed-mississippi-education-funding-legislature-formula/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://mississippitoday.org">Mississippi Today</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://i0.wp.com/mississippitoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/MT_icon-logo-favicon-1.png?fit=134%2C150&amp;ssl=1" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;"><img id="republication-tracker-tool-source" src="https://mississippitoday.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=1116509&amp;ga4=G-VSX4B701MS" style="width:1px;height:1px;">

Bobby Harrison

Bobby Harrison, Mississippi Today’s senior capitol reporter, covers politics, government and the Mississippi State Legislature. He also writes a weekly news analysis which is co-published in newspapers statewide. A native of Laurel, Bobby joined our team June 2018 after working for the North Mississippi Daily Journal in Tupelo since 1984. He is president of the Mississippi Capitol Press Corps Association and works with the Mississippi State University Stennis Institute to organize press luncheons. Bobby has a bachelor's in American Studies from the University of Southern Mississippi and has received multiple awards from the Mississippi Press Association, including the Bill Minor Best Investigative/In-depth Reporting and Best Commentary Column.

MS lawmakers still can't agree how to fund K-12 education. House reintroduces its own plan

Democratic leaders troubled by advocates of inspire act.

The Mississippi House of Representatives has revived its vehicle for a new K-12 education funding model and sent it back to the Senate for further consideration.

On Wednesday in the Mississippi State Capitol, House Education Chairman Rep. Rob Roberson asked lawmakers to pass an amendment to Senate Bill 2693, which originally sought to provide a process for failing school districts to move into a district of transformation. The bill passed 103-16.

That amendment was to strip all of the bill's language and replace it with his INSPIRE Act, a new funding model that would replace the Mississippi Adequate Education Program, which uses an objective math formula that dictates lawmakers to fund it, with a new enrollment and committee-based funding model. The INSPIRE Act has already died twice in the Senate.

Read more about Senate killing INSPIRE Mississippi Senate blocks House K-12 education funding bill

"This will give us one more opportunity to give the Senate a chance to look at this and do what is best and right for our school children," Roberson, R-Starkville, said.

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

The House initially passed the INSPIRE Act under HB 1453 March 7, but Senate Education Chairman Dennis DeBar, R-Leakesville, did not pass it through his committee by an April 2 deadline to move it onto the Senate's general calendar.

In March, the House also amended DeBar's MAEP revision, SB 2332, striking all of the language and inserting the INSPIRE Act. That move kept the bill alive until Tuesday, when the Senate voted not to concur and to let the bill die instead of taking it to conference, which would feature lawmakers from both chambers to possibly iron out a compromise.

On Wednesday, the Senate also passed a $2.94 billion appropriation to almost fully fund MAEP for the third time since its inception in the 1990s, along with language in the bill for the Mississippi Department of Education to study whether MAEP or the INSPIRE Act is a better funding model. MDE would report back to lawmakers with the results of that study in October.

Under the House plan, lawmakers would need to appropriate $3.01 billion to fully fund it.

Differences in House and Senate plan Mississippi Legislature chambers pass competing education funding bills. See what they are

Democratic leaders asking for an open education discussion

Republicans aren't the only ones talking about the heated debate between the Senate and the House over how to fund education, though.

Democratic leaders Rep. Robert Johnson, D-Natchez and Sen. Derrick Simmons, D-Greenville, said in a press release issued earlier this week that they feel throwing out MAEP so quickly is a step in the wrong direction.

"No one in this building is under the illusion that MAEP is a perfect formula," Simmons and Johnson said. "However, scrapping it completely and in this fashion — quickly and without thorough vetting — isn’t the solution. It’s certainly not the solution when some of the new formula’s architects and most vocal supporters are people who’ve historically sought to dismantle public education at every turn."

DeBar, who tried to kill the INSPIRE Act on Wednesday, had similar concerns and said he was willing to meet with House members in the summer or next year to come to a more thorough decision.

However, House leaders, including Roberson and Rep. Jansen Owen, R-Poplarville, told the Clarion Ledger that if the INSPIRE Act isn't the state's funding model by the end of the legislative session, they would rather come back for a special session than to fund MAEP. House Speaker Jason White had similar words in a press release issued Tuesday.

"I have clearly communicated with Senate leadership the House position that we have funded MAEP for the last time," White said.

Johnson and Simmons also had concerns over the origins of data used in the INSPIRE Act and why the bill has been supported by third party groups advocating for school choice and public funds going toward private education.

"It doesn’t make things any easier when we can’t get a straightforward answer on where theformula’s numbers came from or why the groups at the table from the formula’s inceptionweren’t public education advocates or longtime legislative allies, but instead were groups whosupport school choice and other policies that undermine Mississippi’s public education system," Simmons and Johnson said.

Read on group going to watch CCID court 'It will be the most closely watched court in Mississippi.' Group to collect data on CCID

With SB 2693 now in the Senate, DeBar has until April 25 to take any action on the bill. Similarly, the House will have until April 25 to pass the Senate's education funding bill. School districts are currently funded through MAEP until July 1.

Grant McLaughlin covers state government for the Clarion Ledger. He can be reached at [email protected] or 972-571-2335.

Join CT Mirror and its members in the work of producing unbiased journalism for Connecticut.

Connecticut's Nonprofit Journalism.

House GOP budget: Boost K-12, cut care for undocumented

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Minority House Republicans challenged their colleagues Thursday to balance the next state budget, pitching a $26 billion plan that prioritizes education but would end health care for undocumented women and children while continuing to downsize the state’s workforce.

The caucus plan also would plug holes involving retirement benefits and Medicaid while eliminating a highway use tax on commercial trucks and scaling back overall revenue assumptions to reflect eroding sales tax receipts. But GOP leaders also conceded there likely would be far less funds available than Democrats are seeking to invest in higher education and social services.

The Republican plan, which majority Democrats likely will oppose, also would eliminate a state agency focusing on equity issues; free phone messaging for inmates; and a Medicaid expansion for older adults and persons with disabilities.

The preliminary $26 billion budget the General Assembly adopted last June for the 2024-25 fiscal year is about $30 million over the spending cap and lacks adequate funding for retirement benefits and Medicaid. It also no longer reflects sales tax revenue trends, which are down by more than $200 million.

Majority Democrats have announced they won’t formally adjust that plan, despite these deficiencies.

“Not only is that an abdication of our constitutional obligation to balance the budget, it’s also a path right back to the irresponsible fiscal practices that dogged Connecticut for years,” said House Minority Leader Vincent J. Candelora, R-North Branford.

Democrats counter things aren’t that simple.

State government has more than enough money to cover all those projected holes with funds left over. But budget controls, which advocates like Gov. Ned Lamont have dubbed “fiscal guardrails,” require the state to save those funds, not spend them. Those saved dollars then could be used to pay down state pension debt or to build budget reserves.

But Candelora said if the legislature abandons these controls, it risks pushing finances into the red sooner than many would imagine.

Potential holes in next fiscal year’s finances are in the range of $500 million to $600 million, while the savings cushions in the guardrails system stand at $750 million — and could grow next week when revenue estimates are updated.

Democrats also want to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in emergency federal pandemic relief to cover ongoing expenses next fiscal year in higher education, social services and health care. And once those dollars are exhausted after next year, the state could be staring at deficits once again, Candelora said.

Investing in K-12 and early childhood education

So what can Connecticut afford in its next budget while balancing the books and following the guardrails system?

The House GOP plan would spend about $53 million less than Lamont proposed in February and fall under the spending cap by $43.5 million.

It would retain the $150 million investment in K-12 education the General Assembly endorsed last June for 2024-25 while boosting by $79.5 million payments to districts to cover special education costs.

Another $7 million would be used to boost Medicaid rates supporting the Birth to 3 program and $12 million to bolster CT Care 4 Kids program, a partnership between the state and various child care services.

The preliminary state budget for 2024-25 underfunded the state’s required annual contribution to the pension system for municipal teachers by $43 million, and the House GOP plan would plug that hole.

Rep. Tammy Nuccio of Tolland, ranking House Republican on the Appropriations Committee, noted the caucus budget includes close to $300 million in new spending for local education compared with the current fiscal year. 

“If that’s not a headline, I don’t know what else is,” she said.

Eliminating the highway mileage tax on commercial trucks

Rep. Holly Cheeseman of East Lyme, ranking House Republican on the tax-writing Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said her caucus also focused on the latest healthy surplus that the state budget’s Special Transportation Fund is accruing.

The Lamont administration estimated earlier this month that the $2.15 billion STF, which represents about 9% of the  overall state budget , is projected to close the fiscal year on June 30 with  $246 million or 11.5% left ove r.

The administration has faced criticism over the past few years for not accelerating Connecticut’s rebuild of its aging transportation infrastructure. The STF, which covers debt service on the borrowing that pays for much of that capital work, is on pace for its third successive year of a surplus topping 10%.

The GOP says Connecticut could easily afford to repeal the highway mileage tax on large commercial trucks, which would cost the STF $66 million next fiscal year. Critics of the levy say it exacerbates inflation on groceries and other goods shipped by truck.

Lamont, who proposed the tax two years ago, says it ensures out-of-state trucking firms help pay for the damage their vehicles do to Connecticut highways.

Cuts to health care and state agency staffing

But to prioritize local education and close holes in the budget, Republicans had to give in other areas.

The caucus proposed ending all Medicaid coverage for undocumented children . It also would eliminate coverage for postpartum services for undocumented women. These steps would save almost $46 million next fiscal year.

Another $8 million would be saved by scrapping an expansion of the HUSKY C program , which serves older adults and people with disabilities.

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas called the proposal to cut Medicaid for undocumented children “misguided.”

“I think that’s one of the bigger expenditure cuts that they make — for undocumented individuals,” he said. “I think politically that works for them. I think, ethically, and as a human, these are individuals who need health care, and all of us will pay for it one way or another.”

House Speaker Matt Ritter declined to assess it in detail Thursday morning, noting his office had just received it.

“We’ll take a look at it,” he added. “If they have good ideas, we will always look at them.”

But as for embracing any House Republican proposals before the regular legislative session ends on May 8, Ritter added, “at this late hour, it might be difficult.”

Rank-and-file Democratic legislators also likely would oppose House Republican efforts to eliminate the state Commission on Women, Children, Seniors, Equity & Opportunity, and to cancel $227,000 reserves for inflationary-adjustment races for legislators and constitutional officers.

And a key part of the Democrats’ base, state employee unions, is expected to object to a House Republican proposal to save $26.1 million next fiscal year by eliminating funding for vacant positions. The state’s workforce is down 22% from 15 years ago, and union leaders say many agencies and departments are dangerously understaffed.

Lamont, a Democrat, said through budget spokesman Chris Collibee that “We appreciate their [House Republican] efforts to propose budget adjustments for FY 2025. While we may not agree with all of the adjustments that House Republicans have proposed, the legislature has signaled that it will maintain the adopted budget for FY 2025 without revision. To that end, we are working with legislative leadership to address resources for priorities in the coming year while maintaining adherence to the governor’s commitment to an honestly balanced budget.”

GOP: No added funds for higher education without a balanced budget

Republicans concede their plan leaves little extra to invest next fiscal year in higher education and social services unless they are willing to use temporary federal pandemic grants to help.

Lamont has identified about $200 million in funds that must be used before Dec. 31. But public colleges and universities as well as the nonprofit community agencies that deliver most social services are seeking ongoing aid to help with ongoing costs.

Candelora said the state budget, given the restrictions placed by the fiscal guardrails, simply doesn’t allow any more spending that could help these groups.

Emergency pandemic relief can be spent outside of the budget and the fiscal controls. But if it’s dedicated to cover ongoing expenses in 2024-25, that only would create a problem one year later, when those pandemic grants have been exhausted.

Candelora said Republicans are willing to support using some pandemic grant funds to assist higher education and social services but only if Democrats agree to other cuts necessary to close all financial holes in the next state budget.

CT Mirror staff writer Mark Pazniokas contributed to this report.

Keith M. Phaneuf State Budget Reporter

Keith has spent most of his 31 years as a reporter specializing in state government finances, analyzing such topics as income tax equity, waste in government and the complex funding systems behind Connecticut’s transportation and social services networks. He has been the state finances reporter at CT Mirror since it launched in 2010. Prior to joining CT Mirror Keith was State Capitol bureau chief for The Journal Inquirer of Manchester, a reporter for the Day of New London, and a former contributing writer to The New York Times. Keith is a graduate of and a former journalism instructor at the University of Connecticut.