Illinois vs. DC School Funding: A Comparative Analysis
This paper compares and contrasts the school funding approaches of Illinois and Washington, D.C. It examines how each jurisdiction funds its schools, the types of taxes and aid formulas relied upon, and the equity and equality challenges each faces. Illinois struggles with deep financial instability, heavy reliance on local property taxes, and a wide gap between wealthy and impoverished school districts—challenges the state hopes to address through a recently adopted evidence-based funding model. Washington, D.C., by contrast, uses a foundation formula to distribute funds equitably across grade levels and supplements public money with private investment in programs targeting the achievement gap. The paper concludes that D.C. is better positioned than Illinois to achieve long-term educational equity.
- Introduction: Overview of school funding controversy and paper scope
- How Schools Are Funded in Illinois and Washington, D.C.: Funding sources and budgets for each jurisdiction
- Challenges to Each Jurisdiction's Funding Formula: Financial and structural obstacles facing both systems
- Percentages of Local, State, and Federal Aid: Breakdown of funding proportions for Illinois and DC
- Types of Taxes and State Aid Formulas: Property taxes, evidence-based model, and foundation formula
- Equity and Equality Issues: Achievement gap and inequitable distribution challenges
- Reflection and Conclusion: Comparative assessment and long-term outlook for both systems
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Uses a clear parallel structure throughout, addressing each jurisdiction side by side within every section, making comparisons easy to follow.
- Grounds claims in specific data points—percentages of local, state, and federal funding—giving the argument empirical weight without overloading the reader.
- Moves logically from descriptive analysis (how funding works) to evaluative analysis (which system is better positioned for success), giving the paper a satisfying argumentative arc.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper effectively employs comparative analysis as its central method. By organizing each thematic section around both jurisdictions simultaneously, it allows readers to directly weigh the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. This technique is strengthened by the use of cited quantitative evidence (e.g., funding percentages, budget figures) alongside qualitative policy critique.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with an introduction framing the comparison, then proceeds through five parallel analytical sections covering funding sources, formula challenges, aid percentages, tax types and formula types, and equity issues. A reflection section synthesizes the findings with broader socio-political commentary before a conclusion restates the central argument that D.C. is better structured than Illinois to achieve educational equity.
Introduction
Funding for schools is a controversial topic for many, mainly because of the lack of discernible equitability evident throughout the system. This paper takes a close look at two school systems in particular—the Illinois state school system and the Washington, D.C., school system—to see how each approaches the issue of school funding. The paper shows that there are unique challenges faced by each and that new formulas are currently being tried to address specific issues, particularly inequity.
How Schools Are Funded in Illinois and Washington, D.C.
Schools in Illinois are funded by taxes, which vary from district to district. Poor districts receive little funding while affluent districts receive much more. A new funding formula passed in 2018, however, intends to change that and to ensure every school district receives the funding it needs to provide a fair education to all. Using a model that examines individual school districts and directs funds toward improving them, Illinois hopes to close the equitability gap in short order.
Schools in Washington, D.C., are funded by local and federal funds. School districts receive federal funds according to the number of teachers they have, the teachers' experience, and several other variables. Local money supplies the basics for education, while additional local funds go toward "extras" such as technology and after-school programs. There are also a number of DC public school initiatives—such as Excellence through Equity, which is designed to help close the achievement gap, and the Empowering Males of Color and Reign initiative. Currently, $1.74 billion is budgeted for DC schools by the Mayor (District of Columbia Public Schools, 2017).
Challenges to Each Jurisdiction's Funding Formula
The primary challenge to Illinois' funding formula is that the state is essentially bankrupt and simply does not have the funds to pay public employees or distribute money evenly among its various districts, although it intends to do so in the near term. The long-term outlook is far less optimistic. As Stettler, Msall, Grossman, and Hinz (2017) indicate, the state's bankrupt school system sends a troubling message to markets, and the state's leaders are not prepared to enter into bankruptcy even though Stettler et al. (2017) suggest this outcome may be inevitable. The fact that so many impoverished school districts are counting on receiving funds from the new evidence-based formula—while wealthier school districts attempt to maintain their advantage as residents flee the state and its rising tax rates—illustrates how deep these challenges run. There is no easy solution to these problems.
Challenges to D.C.'s funding formula center on maintaining positive private investment in the area, since private funds help raise capital to support school infrastructure throughout the District. As D.C. divides up funds according to the weighted needs of different levels of education, the District has also sought investment from private donors to boost school excellence through various programs and initiatives. The ongoing challenge is to sustain interest in these initiatives and to demonstrate to investors that their contributions are yielding measurable results.
Percentages of Local, State, and Federal Aid
Illinois's general state aid percentage was 16.4%, while 9.7% came from other state funding. Local funding totaled 65.9%, with 61.1% coming from local property taxes and 4.8% from other local revenues. Federal aid accounted for 8.1% (Malin & Noppe, 2015).
For D.C., approximately 10% of funding comes from federal sources while roughly 90% comes from local funds. The District has no state funding since it is not one of the 50 states of the U.S. (U.S. Department of Education, 2013).
Types of Taxes and State Aid Formulas
The main type of tax relied upon in Illinois is the property tax, which makes up well over half of the funding for schools across its districts. However, the fact that Illinois loses residents each year—driving property values down and tax rates up—indicates that the system is strained and that the state is sinking further into debt just to service its existing obligations.
The main type of tax relied upon in D.C. is also the local property tax, which, as in Illinois, funds the bulk of school district operations. Because D.C. is a geographically compact area with more concentrated income streams than the state of Illinois, the challenge of dispersing funds equitably is comparatively less severe.
Illinois recently adopted an "evidence-based model" for distributing state aid to schools throughout the state (Korecki, 2017). This model allows low-income school districts to receive more funding and replaces the old formula, which relied upon local property taxes to fund local school districts. The amount each school receives is calculated using various metrics to identify the exact funding required to ensure students receive a solid educational experience. Chicago also has a private scholarship fund of $75 million, designed as a five-year pilot program that allows "individuals and corporations to earn tax credits for donating to a scholarship fund that benefits eligible families who send their children to private schools" (Korecki, 2017). The new Tax Credit Scholarship program also allows district-authorized charter schools to obtain equal funding and gives families of low economic status access to private schools.
The District of Columbia uses a "foundation," or base, formula for aid, with grade levels K–3, 4–8, and 9–12 all receiving a roughly fair and even weighted share of the distribution (Griffith, 2015). This method allows D.C. to distribute aid according to perceived need. It differs from a modified foundation formula—used by many other states—in that a modified foundation varies the base funding from one school district to the next rather than applying a common base to all schools.
References
District of Columbia Public Schools. (2017). Excellence through equity. Retrieved from https://dcps.dc.gov/release/mayor-bowser-and-dc-public-schools-launch-excellence-through-equity-funding-26-million-all
Griffith, M. (2015). State education funding formulas. Retrieved from
Korecki, N. (2017). Illinois overhauls system for funding public schools. Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/29/illinois-public-schools-funding-242144
Malin, J. R., & Noppe, R. J., Jr. (2015). Illinois. Journal of Education Finance, 40(3), 314–318.
Stettler, P., Msall, L., Grossman, K., & Hinz, G. (2017). Illinois politics and public finance 101. Municipal Finance Journal, 37(4), 1–20.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Revenues and expenditures. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015303.pdf
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.