18. Equitable Operational Funding and Equal Access to All State and Federal Categorical Funding

While it appears that this law has many of the model law components related to equitable operational and categorical funding, there is no evidence yet of the actual level of equity.
Alabama law provides that for each of its students, a public charter school shall receive the same amount of state funds, including funds earmarked for the Foundation Program transportation, school nurses, technology coordinators, and other line items that may be included in the appropriation for the Foundation Program Fund, that, for the then-current fiscal year, would have otherwise been allocated on behalf of each public charter school student to the local school system where the student resides. This amount shall reflect the status of each student according to grade level, economic disadvantage, limited English proficiency, and special education needs.
Alabama law provides, that for each of its students, a public charter school shall receive the same amount of local tax revenue, that, for the then-current fiscal year, would have otherwise been allocated on behalf of each public charter school student to the local non-charter public school of each student's residence, excluding those funds already earmarked through a vote of the local school board for debt service, capital expenditures, or transportation. As necessary, the department shall promulgate processes and procedures to determine the specific local revenue allocations according to the Foundation Program for each public charter school.
Alabama law provides that the maximum annual local tax allocation forwarded to a start-up public charter school from a local school system shall, for each student, not exceed the per student portion of the state required 10 mill ad valorem match. It also provides that the maximum annual local tax allocation forwarded to a conversion public charter school from a local school system shall, for each student, equal the amount that would have been received by the local education agency of the student's residence for each student who now attends a conversion public charter school, minus any amounts otherwise excluded.
Alabama law provides that the state department of education shall direct the proportionate share of moneys generated under federal and state categorical aid programs to public charter schools serving students eligible for such aid.
Alabama law provides that the state department of education shall disburse state transportation funding to a public charter school on the same basis and in the same manner as it is paid to public school systems. It also provides that public charter schools that do not provide transportation services shall not be allocated any federal, state, or local funds otherwise earmarked for transportation-related expenses.
In the Fiscal Year 2021 budget, New Schools for Alabama was successful in securing a direct allocation for $400,000. $400,000 was also allocated directly to the Commission to support its operations and responsibilities. The New Schools for Alabama line item is to support new school development and the organization accomplishes this through the School Founders Program. The School Founders Program is a leadership development program that supports aspiring school leaders during the pre-application phase and puts them through a year-long leadership fellowship, preparing them to write their application and ensuring that the Commission gets high-quality and prepared applicants. The selection process for this program is highly competitive and has produced four fellows total in its past two cohorts. The first cohort opened their schools in Montgomery and Perry County in Fall 2021 and the second cohort's leaders have both been approved to open in Bessemer in Fall 2022.

Alaska law includes some of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, and there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
Alaska law requires a local school board to provide a charter school with an annual program budget which shall not be less than the amount generated by the students enrolled in the charter school less administrative costs retained by the school district, determined by applying the indirect cost rate approved by the department up to four percent. Costs directly related to charter school facilities, including rent, utilities, and maintenance, may not be included in an annual program budget for the purposes of calculating the four percent cap on administrative costs.

The law provides that the “amount generated by students enrolled in the charter school” is to be determined in the same manner as it would be for a student enrolled in another public school in that school district and includes funds generated by grants, appropriations, federal impact aid, the required local contribution, the local contribution under AS 14.17.410(c), special needs under AS 14.17.420(a)(1), and secondary school vocational and technical instruction under AS 14.17.420(a)(3).

Alaska charter school law requires the local district also pass along to the charter school on a per-pupil basis any local contribution under AS 14.17.410(c), which allows local districts to seek a mill levy increase of up to 2 mills.

The law requires a school district that provides transportation services under state law to provide transportation services to students attending a charter school operated by the district under a policy adopted by the district. The policy must: be developed with input solicited from individuals involved with the charter school, including staff, students, and parents; at a minimum, provide transportation services for students enrolled in the charter school on a space available basis along the regular routes that the students attending schools in an attendance area in the district are transported; and be approved by the state department of education. If a school district fails to adopt a policy, the school district shall allocate the amount received for each charter school student to each charter school operated by the district based on the number of students enrolled in the charter school.

Alaska law allows a charter school that is established on or after the effective date of this section to receive a one-time grant from the state department of education equal to the amount of $500 for each student enrolled in the school on October 1 of the first year in which the school applies for the grant. The charter school shall use a grant received under this section to provide educational services, which include curriculum development, program development, and special education services.

Arizona law calculates a base support level for each charter school and these funds flow directly to charter schools for those approved by non-district entities. For those approved by a local district board, it flows through that district.

Arizona law provides equal access to all applicable categorical federal and state funding and clear guidance on the pass-through of such funds.
For charter schools authorized by local school boards, the law allows the district to provide transportation. In 2021, Arizona created a $30 million transportation program for charter school families. This program will help charter schools to develop new transportation solutions for their students and provide parents with direct grants to cover school transportation costs.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Arizona charter schools were receiving on average $7,199 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $8,629 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $1,430 per pupil - or 16.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Per Arkansas law, a conversion charter school receives funds equal to the amount apportioned by the district from state and local revenue per average daily membership.
Per Arkansas law, an open enrollment charter school receives funds equal to the amount that a public school would receive, as well as any other funding that the public charter school is entitled to receive under law. In reality, traditional districts are allowed to levy mileages (i.e., property taxes) that open enrollment schools don’t have access to.

In reference to transportation, Arkansas law provides charter schools the same per pupil base amount for transportation as public school districts.

In a recent national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Arkansas charter schools were receiving on average $7,451 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $11,441 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $3,990 per pupil - or 34.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

California law funds all public schools, including charter schools, via the Local Control Funding Formula, which is a weighted student funding formula that funds schools based on pupil needs.California law requires all special education funds to flow through an intermediate unit (SELPA) that receives special education funds for all LEAs in that SELPA.
A national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014) found that California charter schools were receiving on average $7,821 per pupil in public funds, while districts would have received an estimated $10,446 per pupil to educate those same students – a gap of $2,625 per pupil, or 25.1%. This comparison includes all sources of funding. However, this gap is expected to decrease as new data is gathered that reflects the state's new funding system for all public schools.
The assessment of funding equity for California’s charter schools is largely based on data from the 2010-11 school year – one of the worst for school funding in California. Since the enactment of the Local Control Funding Formula and new school revenues as a result of Proposition 30, California charter schools have made significant gains in their level of funding and in funding equity compared to school districts serving similar student populations. While we acknowledge this change in this report, the recent impact of these changes is not fully reflected in the score or ranking.

Colorado law provides that charter schools are entitled to 100% of district per-pupil operating revenues for each pupil they enroll and 100% of the district per-pupil online funding for each online pupil they enroll, minus administrative costs up to a limit. The law also requires districts to share locally raised mill levy override funds with charter schools. A fund has been established to equalize funding for state-authorized schools and provided with $9 million in state funding for 2021-22.
Colorado law provides that charter schools are eligible for their proportionate share of federal and state categorical funding. In practice, there are some implementation problems with this provision where funds are passed through district LEAs.

The law provides that charter schools that meet state reimbursement criteria are eligible for transportation funding on the same basis as school districts.
State law requires school districts to annually report how much mill levy dollars they receive and how many of those are provided to charter schools.

Connecticut law provides that the state board may grant initial certificates of approval for charters for local and state charter schools. Upon granting an initial certificate of approval for a charter, the state board must submit a copy of the certificate and a summary of the comments made at a required public hearing to the joint standing committees of the General Assembly having cognizance of matters relating to education and appropriations and the budgets of state agencies. The law provides that the General Assembly may appropriate funds to the Department of Education for the purposes of providing funds to local and state charter schools. If such funds are appropriated, an initial certificate of approval for a charter shall be effective and deemed a charter as of July 1st of the fiscal year for which such funds are appropriated.

For local charter schools, state law provides that the local or regional board of education of the school district in which the local charter school is located is responsible for the financial support of such local charter school at a level that is at least equal to the product of the per pupil cost for the prior fiscal year, less the reimbursement pursuant to state law for the current fiscal year, and the number of students attending such local charter school in the current fiscal year.
For state charter schools, Connecticut law provides that the funding comes directly from a separate state appropriation, with no local contribution. Currently, the annual per-pupil amount is $11,525. 

Connecticut law provides that charter schools are eligible for additional categorical federal and state funds.  

For transportation, Connecticut law provides that the school district in which the charter school is located must provide transportation services for charter students who reside in that district unless the charter school makes other arrangements for such transportation. It also allows school districts to provide transportation for those residing outside the district and be reimbursed for the reasonable costs of such transportation. 
 
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Connecticut charter schools were receiving on average $11,322 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $18,527 for those students.  As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $7,205 per pupil - or 38.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students.  This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant inequities exist both for operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).  

Delaware law provides that charter schools are funded through the same funding formula used for districts, with some exceptions.Delaware law provides funding for charter school transportation at 75% of the average cost per student for transporting students within the vocational district in which the charter school is located.
Delaware law provides that all public school students, including public charter school students, in grades six through 12 may use annual student bus passes from the Delaware Transit Corporation for use on fixed route public transit.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Delaware charter schools were receiving on average $8,776 per pupil, while traditional public schools would have received $13,363 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $4,587 per pupil - or 34.3% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals continued inequities for operational, categorical, and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

The law requires that similarly situated charter school students and district students be funded uniformly under the uniform per-pupil funding formula. This provision applies only to operating funding from the District’s general fund. However, the school district receives significant additional operating funds through other city and federal agencies that charter schools cannot access.
The law entitles charter schools to their share of entitlement funding pursuant to formula.

The law provides that charter school students are eligible for reduced fares on DC public transportation to the same extent as district students. It specifies that eligible special education students are entitled to state-funded special education transportation (In DC, only special education students receive transportation from the school district).

A national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014) found that DC charter schools were receiving $18,759 per pupil in public funds while the school district received $32,266 per pupil --- a difference of $13,507 or 41.9 percent. This comparison includes all sources of funding. The study attributes the funding disparity primarily to a) facilities funding inequity, and b) charters’ lack of access to substantial federal and city funding that benefits the school district. (See component #19 for information on capital funding)

Florida law provides that charter schools should be funded the same as other public schools and that charter schools are entitled to their proportionate share of categorical program funds included in the Florida Education Finance Program, including transportation.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Florida charter schools were receiving on average $7,649 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $10,109 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $2,460 per pupil – or 24.3% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Georgia law provides that local and state boards must treat a start-up charter school no less favorably than other local schools with regard to funds for instruction, school administration, transportation, food services and, where feasible, building programs.
Under Georgia law, district-authorized charter schools must be included in state funding formula quality basic education (QBE) earnings, applicable QBE grants, non-QBE state grants, and applicable federal grants to the local school system.
The law provides that conversion charter schools must be treated no less favorably and the local and state boards must treat start-up charters no less favorably than other local schools with respect to funds for instruction, school administration, transportation, food services, and, where feasible, building programs.
The law requires equitable distribution of federal funding for charter schools and requires the posting by a local board authorizer on its website the calculation of all local, state, and federal funding provided to its chartered schools.

The law provides additional resources to state-authorized charter schools through state supplement and capital revenue funding streams.

The law requires local boards of education to provide their local charter schools with timely annual allotment sheets that itemize how much local, state, and federal funding is being provided to charter schools. It also requires 30 days' notice before any allocation is adjusted.

Legislation enacted in 2021 provides that students enrolled in Georgia’s locally-approved public charter schools will receive a dedicated funding weight that increases school allocations by approximately $100 per pupil. Additionally, this legislation ensures that school districts provide locally-approved charter schools their proportionate share of federal funding.

Hawaii provides operational funds to its charter schools via a line item appropriation in the state budget, using a charter schools account as a separate account in the state treasury. The law notes that the non-facility general fund per-pupil funding is to be the same as that allocated for traditional public schools. It also directs the state director of finance to transfer additional general fund money to charter schools as needed. The law also provides that charter schools are eligible for all applicable federal funding.In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Hawaii charter schools were receiving on average $8,986 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $13,601 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $4,615 per pupil – or 33.9% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Idaho law provides that charter schools are funded by the same state formula as district schools for operational funding, but they do not receive any local tax revenues or supplemental levies. The law limits charter school public funding to state sources and any federal dollars that schools qualify for. The state funding formula does not compensate for charters’ lack of access to local revenues.
The law entitles each charter school to receive an advance payment from the state of 25% of its estimated per-pupil funding in the summer before its first year and each subsequent year in which the school expands enrollment by at least 20 students. It also provides that subsequent payments are to be made in the same manner as for district schools.

Idaho law provides that charter schools designated as LEAs receive federal funds directly.

The law provides that charter schools must receive from the state 85% of their actual cost for student transportation, provided on a reimbursement basis in July for the previous school year.

A national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014) found that Idaho charter schools were receiving on average $5,669 per pupil in public funds, while districts would have received $7,949 per pupil to educate those students. Thus, charter schools were receiving $2,280 – or 28.6% -- less per pupil than districts would have received to educate those students. This comparison includes all sources of funding. The gap between charter and district per-pupil funding is largely attributable to charters’ lack of access to 1) local revenues, and 2) capital and debt service funds. (See component #19 for information on capital funding).

Under current law, charters may receive no less than 97% and no more than 103% of what their host district spends per student in district-run schools.
State board-authorized charters serve as their own LEAs. All other charters in the state are part of their district’s LEA. State board-authorized charters must apply for and receive any categorical funds. District-authorized charters can’t always apply for such categorical funds directly because they are a school that is part of a district.

State board-authorized charters’ transportation funding is similar to some districts, although it is less than lower-wealth districts’ fund. The minimum amount to be received by a state board-authorized charter is $16 times the number of eligible pupils transported. The law also provides that a school board must provide free transportation to any charter school student who also resides at least 1.5 miles away from the school.

Indiana law grants charters access to most state and federal funding. However, there are still glaring deficiencies in the funding provided to charters, including that charters do not receive local tax levies for transportation and facilities and do not have access to the local capital funds for insurance costs.
Legislation enacted in 2020 provides that a school corporation may distribute money that is received as part of a referendum tax levy to a charter school, excluding a virtual charter school, that is located in the attendance area of the school corporation. The legislation provides that the resolution adopted by a school corporation to place a referendum on the ballot must indicate whether proceeds collected from the tax levy will be used to provide a distribution to a charter school or charter schools, excluding a virtual charter school, as well as the amount that will be distributed.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Indiana charter schools were receiving on average $8,045 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $12,897 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $4,852 per pupil - or 37.6% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals continued inequities for operational, categorical, and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

The law provides that each student enrolled in a charter school shall be counted, for state school foundation purposes, in the student's district of residence pursuant to section 257.6, subsection 1, paragraph subparagraph (9), including any applicable amounts under section 256B.9.
The law provides that the school district of residence shall pay to the charter school in which the student is enrolled in the manner required under section 282.18, and pursuant to the timeline in section 282.20, subsection 3, an amount equal to the sum of the state cost per pupil for the previous school year plus the teacher leadership supplement state cost per pupil for the previous fiscal year as provided in section 257.9 plus any moneys received for the student as a result of the non-English speaking weighting under section 280.4, subsection 3, for the previous school year multiplied by the state cost per pupil for the previous year.
For each student enrolled in the charter school who was not included in the actual enrollment of the district of residence under section 257.6, subsection 1, in the previous school year, the amount otherwise required to be paid under paragraph or "b" shall instead be paid by the department to the charter school for the student's initial year of enrollment in the charter school. There is appropriated annually from the general fund of the state to the department of education an amount necessary to pay these amounts to charter schools.
If necessary, and pursuant to rules adopted by the state board, funding amounts required for the first school year of a new charter school shall be based on enrollment estimates for the charter school included in the charter school contract. Initial amounts paid using estimated enrollments shall be reconciled during the subsequent payment based on actual enrollment of the charter school during the first school year.

Kansas law does not include any of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, and there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
While Kansas law does not provide funding to charter schools for transportation similar to school districts, it requires school districts to provide transportation for charter students who qualify for the free-lunch program and live 2 1/2 miles or more from the school. The law also states that this provision does not prohibit a board of education from providing transportation to and from a charter school for all pupils attending the school.

Louisiana law includes some of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, but there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
Louisiana law makes the funding requirements and allocation process clear for each charter type.

The law provides that those approved by local school boards receive their money through them, while those approved by the state board or a local charter authorizer receive funding directly from the state.

Statute indicates that charter schools have access to all applicable categorical federal and state funding.

It also provides some funding for transportation within the allocations provided to charter schools.

Maine law includes many of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, but there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
Maine law provides that state allocation funds follow each student to the public charter school attended by the student, but allows districts to retain up to 1% of the per-pupil allocation for administrative costs associated with the transfer of funds.

For transportation expenses, the law provides that the transportation operating allocation must be the statewide per-pupil essential programs and services transportation operating allocation multiplied by pupil counts multiplied by the percentage established by the commission for the public charter school but not to exceed 100%.

Maryland law requires county boards to disburse to charters an amount of county, state, and federal money that is commensurate with the amount disbursed to other public schools in the local jurisdiction.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Maryland charter schools were receiving on average $11,754 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $18,053 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $6,299 per pupil - or 34.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for operational, but the significant inequities exist for capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Massachusetts law provides that charter schools are funded by tuition charges assessed against the school districts where the students reside. The state provides partial reimbursement to the sending districts for the tuition costs incurred.
Massachusetts laws and regulation provide equal access to all applicable categorical federal and state funding, and clear guidance on the pass-through of such funds, including for charter schools that are significantly expanding.

Massachusetts law requires school districts to provide transportation to charter school students on the same basis as it is provided to regular public school students in the district. In providing such transportation, the law requires districts to accommodate the particular school year and school day of the charter school, in accordance with state law. If a district and a charter school cannot reach agreement about the service to be provided, and if the charter school finds an alternative that costs the same as or less than the average cost of transportation per student in the district, the law allows the charter school to provide its own transportation services to students eligible for transportation. In such cases, the law provides that the costs for such services will be deducted from a district's account on a quarterly basis, based on estimated and actual expenditures for transportation.

Comparable district and charter school financial reports are published on the state department of education’s website.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Massachusetts charter schools were receiving on average $12,861 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $17,555 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $4,694 per pupil - or 26.7% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for operational, but the significant inequities exist for capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Per statute, charter schools receive a “foundation allowance” (that is, basic, per pupil operating revenue) from the state and generally have equal access to categorical funding. These provisions should result in 100% of state and school district operations funding following each student. In reality, the amount of foundation allowance is dependent on the district in which the charter school is located, as Michigan law provides that charter schools must receive the same foundation as the district in which they are located or a state maximum foundation allowance, whichever is less. This approach results in the majority of charters receiving a smaller foundation allowanceed from the state than the local district in which they are located. Michigan law requires intermediate school districts to share regional enhancement property tax dollars with charter schools on an equitable basis.
Michigan law does not provide transportation funding to either school districts or charter schools.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Michigan charter schools were receiving on average $9,270 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $12,700 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $3,430 per pupil - or 27% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for operational, but the significant inequities exist for capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Minnesota law provides that a charter school earns general education revenue on a per pupil unit basis just as though it were a school district. Charter schools in rural areas also qualify for transportation sparsity aid as if they were school districts. If a charter school chooses to have the district in which it is physically located provide transportation services, then 4.66% of the per pupil basic formula allowance plus the transportation sparsity aid for each charter school student is transferred to the providing district for transportation expenses.
The law provides that charter schools as LEAs have equal access to all applicable categorical funding.

Minnesota law's funding formula provides dollars for transportation to charter schools and gives charter schools the option of providing transportation and keeping the transportation funds or requesting the traditional district to provide transportation and then paying those funds to that district in which the school is physically located.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Minnesota charter schools were receiving on average $10,937 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $13,918 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $2,981 per pupil - or 21.4% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and the analysis reveals some continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

The law requires the state department of education to make payments to charter schools for each student in average daily attendance at the charter school equal to the state share of the adequate education program payments for each student in average daily attendance at the school district in which the charter school is located. In calculating the local contribution for purposes of determining the state share of the adequate education program payments, the law requires the state department to deduct the pro rata local contribution of the school district in which the student resides.
The law requires the state department of education to direct the proportionate share of monies generated under federal and state categorical aid programs, including special education, vocational, gifted and alternative school programs, to charter schools serving students eligible for such aid. It requires the department to ensure that charter schools with rapidly expanding enrollments are treated equitably in the calculation and disbursement of all federal and state categorical aid program dollars.

The law requires the state department of education to disburse state transportation funding to a charter school on the same basis and in the same manner as it is paid to school districts under the adequate education program.

While it appears that this law has many of the model law components related to equitable operational and categorical funding, there is no evidence yet of the actual level of equity once implementation of such elements occurs.

Under Missouri law, for the purposes of the calculation and distribution of state aid, pupils enrolled in charter schools are included in the pupil enrollment of the school district where the student resides in the application of the state's per-pupil funding formula.
Missouri law requires districts to pay to charter schools per pupil funding in accordance with a state funding formula as well as other federal and state aid attributable to the charter school. It requires the district to make such payments no later than 20 days following receipt of such funds.

Missouri law provides that charter schools are eligible for state transportation aid and are free to contract with the local district or any other entity for such services.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Missouri charter schools were receiving on average $11,857 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $17,787 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $5,930 per pupil - or 33.3% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Nevada law includes some of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, but there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.

Nevada law provides that each pupil who is enrolled in a charter school, including, without limitation, a pupil who is enrolled in a program of special education in a charter school, must be included in the count of pupils in the school district for the purposes of apportionments and allowances from the State Distributive School Account.

It also provides that a charter school is entitled to receive its proportionate share of any other money available from federal, state, or local sources that the school or the pupils who are enrolled in the school are eligible to receive.

The law does not provide funding for transportation similar to school districts.

In 2021, the state provided $15 million in federal funds to charter schools serving a large percentage of students in the federal Title I program.

For any charter schools approved by a local school board, New Hampshire law provides that a minimum of 80% of the per-pupil expenditures in the school district follows a student to schools.
For charter schools approved by the state board of education, New Hampshire law provides that the state’s annual per pupil contribution to public education (that is, adequacy and disparity aid) follows a student to school.

In theory, charter schools are eligible for all applicable categorical funding, but clear guidance regarding some funds is not available.

The law provides that students attending a chartered public school shall be provided bus transportation to their school on the same terms and conditions provided for students attending non-chartered public schools.
The bulk of the state’s charters are authorized by the state board of education, not local school boards. According to recent data, the state-authorized charters receive $6,958 per pupil, as compared to state average for district students of approximately $13,000 per pupil.

New Jersey law requires the school district of residence to pay directly to the charter school for each student enrolled in the charter school who resides in the district an amount equal to the lower of either 90% of the program budget per pupil for the specific grade level in the district or 90% of the maximum T&E amount (which is defined in state law). The law provides that the per-pupil amount paid to the charter school shall not exceed the program budget per pupil for the specific grade level in the district in which the charter school is located.
The law also provides that for any student enrolled in a charter school in which 90% of the program budget per pupil for the specific grade level is greater than 90% of the maximum T&E amount, the state shall pay the difference between the two amounts.

In the case of a student who was not included in the district's projected resident enrollment for the school year, the law requires the state to pay 100% of the amount required pursuant to subsection b. of this section for the first year of the student's enrollment in the charter school.

New Jersey law allows for substantial funding disparities by some charter schools relative to regular district schools caused by the exclusion of charter schools from state adjustment aid payments.

The law also provides that the district of residence shall pay directly to the charter school any categorical aid attributable to the student, provided the student is receiving appropriate categorical services, and any federal funds attributable to the student.

The law requires local school boards to provide transportation or aid in lieu of transportation for K-12 students attending charter schools.

In a recent national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), New Jersey charter schools were receiving on average $14,887 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $21,834 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $6,947 per pupil - or 31.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

New Mexico law provides the amount of funding allocated to a charter school must be not less than ninety-eight percent of the school-generated program cost. It allows an authorizer to withhold and use two percent of the school-generated program cost for its administrative support of a charter school.
The law provides that portion of money from state or federal programs generated by students enrolled in a locally chartered charter school must be allocated to that charter school serving students eligible for that aid.

The law provides that when a state-chartered charter school is designated as a board of finance pursuant to state law, it must receive state and federal funds for which it is eligible.

The law provides that state-chartered charter schools may apply for all federal funds for which they are eligible and that locally-chartered schools must be included in their district’s consolidated federal application.

The law requires locally-chartered charter schools to negotiate with a school district to provide transportation to students eligible for transportation under state law. It allows the school district, in conjunction with the charter school, to establish a limit for student transportation to and from the charter school site not to extend beyond the school district boundary.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), New Mexico charter schools were receiving on average $10,034 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $10,505 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $471 per pupil - or 4.4% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals continued inequities for operational, categorical, and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

The law requires districts to pass a proportional share of their per-pupil spending on school operations based on a funding formula, as well as other federal and state aid, to charter schools enrolling students who reside in their geographic area. For 2017-18, the funding is the 2016-17 amount plus $500. Starting in 2018-19, a new formula takes effort.
The law requires pass through payments to charter schools in six substantially equal installments per year. In the event that a district fails to pass along adequate funding to a charter school on a timely basis, the law empowers the New York State Comptroller to deduct funds owed to the charter school from district budgets and direct them to the school. According to charter school advocates in New York, this process is weak in practice, with the state often slow in intercepting dollars from school districts and sending them to charter schools.

Under New York law, charter schools are treated like non-public schools for the purpose of transportation. The law requires charter schools to provide any supplemental transportation.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), New York charter schools were receiving on average $15,271 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $22,976 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $7,705 per pupil - or 33.5% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for operational funding and significant inequities for capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

North Carolina law provides that the state board of education must allocate to each charter school: an amount equal to the average per pupil allocation for average daily membership from the local school administrative unit allotments in which the charter school is located for each child attending the charter school; an additional amount for each child attending the charter school who is a child with disabilities; and an additional amount for children with limited English proficiency attending the charter school, based on a formula adopted by the state board.

North Carolina law provides that if a student attends a charter school, the local school administrative unit in which the child resides must transfer to the charter school an amount equal to the per pupil share of the local current expense fund of the local school administrative unit for the fiscal year.

The law establishes the Charter School Transportation Grant Program. The purpose of the program shall be to award grant funds to charter school that has student enrollment of at least fifty percent of its students residing in households with an income level not in excess of the amount required for a student to qualify for the federal free or reduced-price lunch program. The program provides for the reimbursement of up to sixty-five percent of the eligible student transportation costs incurred by the school. The total amount of each grant awarded under the program shall not exceed $100,000 per charter school per school year. In 2021, the state provided $2.5 million to this program.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), North Carolina charter schools were receiving on average $7,829 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $9,643 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $1,814 per pupil – or 18.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Under Ohio law, charter school funding is the sum of opportunity grant funding, the per-pupil amount of targeted assistance funding for each student’s resident district times 0.25, special education funding, k-3 funding, economically disadvantaged funding times a student’s resident district’s economically disadvantaged index, Limited English Proficiency funding, and career tech funding.

In 2021, Ohio lawmakers allocated $54 million in supplemental state aid for high-performing charter schools. Schools will receive up to an additional $1,750 per pupil for economically disadvantaged students and up to an additional $1,000 per pupil for non-disadvantaged students.

Ohio law allows traditional districts to levy taxes for charter schools that are sponsored by “exemplary” authorizers.

Ohio law requires districts to provide transportation for all charter students, but also allows charter schools to accept responsibility for transportation and receive funding for this directly from the state under prescribed circumstances.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Ohio charter schools were receiving on average $8,580 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $11,674 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $3,184 per pupil – or 27.1% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Oklahoma law requires the state board of education to determine the policy and procedure for making payments to a charter school.

Oklahoma law requires that charter schools receive state aid, but not local dollars.

The law provides that federal dollars flow directly to charter schools and provides a specific, clearly defined process for state dollars.

Oklahoma law creates a tax credit scholarship program that includes charter schools. Every school district in the state – including charter schools – is eligible to fundraise and offer their donors a tax credit of up to 75% of their donation. Each school district and charter school can provide up to $200,000 in tax credits.
Under Oklahoma law, a charter school may provide transportation. Where it is provided, charters receive the same per-pupil allotment as traditional public schools for transportation.

According to a recent study, Oklahoma’s 22 charter schools received 35.9 percent less funding than district schools: $6,001 vs. $9,366 per pupil, respectively, a difference of $3,366 per pupil.

Oregon law provides that per-pupil funding for charter schools is 80% of the weighted Average Daily Maintenance (ADMw) funding formula for students in grades K-8 and 95% of ADMw for students in grades 9-12. The ADMw formula assumes that a charter school serves the same percentage of students in poverty as the district in which it is located.
Oregon law provides that special education funds go to the LEA of residence and establishes the minimum percentages of funds the resident district provides to the charter school.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Oregon charter schools were receiving on average $5,835 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $9,843 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $4,008 per pupil - or 40.7% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Pennsylvania law provides that relevant funding is to follow students based on the average school district per-pupil budgeted expenditure of the previous year, not including any capital or debt service expenditures. For regional charter schools and nonresident students, the law provides that funds must come from the school district of a student’s residence. In practice, the amount received is not necessarily equitable, depending upon the calculations of the district.
Pennsylvania law provides that state subsidy funds flow through the district to the school via 12 equal monthly payments, with the state secretary of education able to automatically divert funds to charter schools from districts not paying on time (although there are no penalties for districts that delay such payments).

Pennsylvania law provides that federal funds for categorical programs go directly to the charter schools, although there are still some categorical grants structured only for school district eligibility (not LEA eligibility).

Pennsylvania law provides that districts must provide transportation to resident students enrolled in a charter school located within 10 miles outside district boundaries or enrolled in a regional charter school of which their school district is a part. The law also provides that if a school district does not provide the required transportation, the state department of education is authorized to deduct the expenses from the school district and pay it to the charter.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Pennsylvania charter schools were receiving on average $12,175 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $17,989 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $5,814 per pupil - or 32.3% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

The state law includes some of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding, but there is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
State law generally provides that funding for each charter school shall consist of state revenue and municipal or district revenue in the same proportions that funding is provided for other schools within the sending school districts. It also provides that funding additional to that authorized from the sending school districts may be allocated to the charter school from the sending school districts to the extent that the combined percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-cost lunch, students with limited English proficiency, and students requiring special education exceed the combined percentage of those students in the sending school districts as a whole.

South Carolina law provides that a local school board authorizer must distribute state, county, and school district funds to a charter school as determined by a formula created in law.
It also provides that the South Carolina Public Charter School District or public or independent institution of higher learning authorizer must receive and distribute state funds to a charter school as provided by the General Assembly. These schools are ineligible to receive local funding. The state budget includes dollars for these schools along with the base student cost per student that each school receives. These dollars equate to $1,900 per virtual charter school student and $3,600 per brick and mortar charter school student.

The law provides that authorizers shall distribute to charter schools federal funds that are allocated to the authorizer on the basis of the number of special characteristics of the students attending the charter schools. The law also provides that the proportionate share of state and federal resources generated by students or staff serving them must be directed to the authorizer. It requires an authorizer to supply to a school the proportional share of each categorical fund for which the charter school qualified within ten business days after the authorizer receives the funds. If the authorizer fails to do so, the law allows the South Carolina Department of Education to fine the authorizer an amount equivalent to the withheld amounts.

South Carolina law provides that charter schools are responsible for providing or contracting for transportation to in-district students. The law provides that the state is not responsible for student transportation unless the charter school is designated by the local school district as the only school selected within the school district’s attendance area.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), South Carolina charter schools were receiving on average $9,045 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $10,266 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $1,221 per pupil - or 11.9% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

For charter schools authorized by local school boards and the achievement school district, Tennessee law requires a local board of education to allocate to a charter school an amount equal to the per student state and local funds received by the district and all appropriate allocations under federal law or regulation, including, but not limited to, Title I and ESEA funds. The law requires the state department of education to promulgate rules and regulations that provide for the determination of the allocation of state and local funds.
A charter school, like an LEA, is generally not required to provide transportation to students. If the charter school decides to provide transportation and does so in compliance with Tennessee statutes on transportation, the transportation funds would flow to the charter school.

In a recent national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Tennessee charter schools were receiving on average $9,087 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $10,583 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $1,496 per pupil - or 16.5% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Texas law provides a funding formula for calculating the funding for open-enrollment charter schools. This funding formula, however, results in inequitable funding for open enrollment charter schools. The law is silent on funding for district-authorized schools.

Texas law specifies that open-enrollment charter schools are entitled to funds that are available to school districts from the state agency or the state commissioner in the form of grants or other discretionary funding unless the statute authorizing the funding explicitly provides that open-enrollment charter schools are not entitled to the funding. This law doesn’t apply to district-authorized charters.

According to state law, charter schools are eligible for the state transportation allotment.

Legislative changes made in 2021 allow public charter schools to apply for the Jobs & Education for Texans program grants, which funds career and technical training program equipment and expand eligibility for Teacher Incentive Allotment bonuses to public charter schools.
In a national study of charter school funding (Statistical Analysis of Texas Charter School Facilities), Texas charter schools were receiving on average $8,860 per pupil, while traditional public schools would have received $10,499 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $1,639 per pupil - or 15% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This analysis reveals continued inequities for operational, categorical, and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Utah law provides state operational funding to charter schools. It also includes a local replacement fund to provide charter schools what school districts receive in property taxes. That fund combines two parts: (1) local property taxes for operations and (2) what districts spend on bonded indebtedness for school buildings. School districts provide about 25% of the funding for the fund. The state picks up the other 75%. The law provides that the amount of the local replacement fund is tied to increases school districts and the Legislature implement either as property tax hikes or as state guarantees to local property taxes. Utah law requires that a minimum of 10% of the local replacement fund must be expended for facilities.
Utah law provides that all charter schools are eligible to receive federal funds if they meet all applicable federal requirements and comply with relevant federal regulations and that local board-authorized schools must receive funding on the same basis that other district schools receive funding.

Virginia law includes a small number of the model law’s provisions for equitable operational and categorical funding. There is no evidence of the amount of funds charters receive versus districts.
Virginia law allows a local school board to establish by contract an agreement stating the conditions for funding the public charter school. The law also provides that the funding shall be commensurate with the average school-based costs of educating the students in the existing schools in the district unless the cost of operating the charter school is less than that average school-based cost.

Virginia law requires the proportionate share of moneys allocated under other federal or state categorical aid programs be directed to public charter schools serving students eligible for such aid, but does not provide clear guidance on the pass-through of such funds.

While it appears that this law has many of the model law components related to equitable operational and categorical funding, there is no evidence yet of the actual level of equity.
Statute provides that the legislature must appropriate funding from the Washington opportunity pathways account (funded from the state lottery) for charter schools in accordance with the provisions of the charter school law, with the legislative intent that such funding should be distributed equitably with state funding provided for other public schools.

The law requires the state superintendent to transmit to each charter school an amount based on the statewide average staff mix factor for certificated instructional staff, including all categorical programs and supplemental instruction and services, as well as any enrichment to those statutory formulae as specified in the appropriations act.

Statute requires that distributions for pupil transportation is to be calculated on a per student basis based on the allocation for the previous school year to the school district in which the charter school is located.

As part of its annual report on charter schools, the law requires the state board to assess the successes, challenges, and areas for improvement in meeting the purposes of this chapter, including the board's assessment of the sufficiency of funding for charter schools, the efficacy of the formula for authorizer funding, and any suggested changes in state law or policy necessary to strengthen the state's charter schools.

The state board shall promulgate a rule setting forth requirements for public charter school funding. The rule shall include a requirement that 90 percent of the per pupil total basic foundation allowance follow the student to the public charter school.

Wisconsin law is silent on how district-authorized charter schools should be funded. It provides that non-district-authorized public charter schools will receive $8,199 per pupil in 2016-17. It also specifies different ways of providing these funds depending on the type of non-district authorizer that approved the school.
The operator of an independent charter school may provide transportation to pupils attending the charter school and may claim transportation aid under state law for pupils so transported.

In a recent national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Wisconsin charter schools were receiving on average $9,870 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $15,879 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $6,009 per pupil - or 37.8% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals significant inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

According to Wyoming law, as part of the charter school contract, the charter school and the school district shall agree on funding and any services to be provided by the school district to the charter school. The law provides that the charter school and the school district shall begin discussions on the contract using the following revenue assumptions:

* The charter school shall be entitled to the benefit of one hundred percent of the foundation program amount computed under state law based upon the average daily membership of the charter school, less certain amounts per state law.
* The charter school shall be entitled to the benefit of one hundred percent of the amount to be contributed to the school district under major maintenance payments pursuant to state law based upon the proportion that the charter school educational building gross square footage contributes to the district educational building gross square footage.

If a charter school or full-time virtual charter school authorized by the state loan and investment board and the school district where the charter school is located do not agree on funding pursuant to the relevant section of the charter school law, then funding for the charter school shall be calculated as provided as follows. Funding for the charter school shall be calculated as follows: (i) All funding for the school district under W.S. 21-13-309(m) that is attributable to the charter school shall be reduced to eighty percent of the amount that would otherwise have been calculated; (ii) All funding for the school district under W.S. 21-13-309(m) that is attributable to the full-time virtual charter school shall be reduced to sixty-five percent of the amount that would otherwise have been calculated; (iii) The charter school shall be entitled to funding as provided in subsection (c) of W.S. 21-2-314 from the reduced amount calculated under paragraph (i) or (ii) of this subsection. Nothing in the law shall be deemed to prohibit a charter school and the school district from negotiating an agreement for charter school students to receive services from the district.