.png)
Every school jurisdiction faces the challenging task of allocating funding when the needs of students always exceed available resources. With education being vital to shaping future generations, it's critical that resources are used effectively. One approach that many state and provincial governments have adopted to distribute education funds is the Weighted Student Model. This model aims to allocate funds based on student needs, while giving school districts flexibility to address local priorities within the flexible or targeted allocations that they are provided.
The Weighted Student Model focuses on distributing funds based on the specific needs of different groups of students, rather than using a one-size-fits-all funding formula. Students that require additional supports above a classroom teacher are provided with a code that generates funding for the school district. A weighted funding model considers factors like socio-economic status, special education needs, and language proficiency to ensure that students who require additional resources receive them. For example, students who need support for behavioral issues, physical or cognitive disabilities, or are learning English as part of their education are typically provided a higher level of financial supports in the funding formula.
This model strives to equitably provide funding to school districts to ensure that every student is being provided with the services and supports and school districts allocate these funds internally in ways that meet their unique challenges. Districts are tasked with balancing competing priorities, such as supporting underperforming students while maintaining a robust curriculum for all.
The weighting system is based on codes assigned to students with specific needs. These codes help determine the amount of funding a district receives for supporting that student. Categories include students requiring special education services, those with behavioral or cognitive impairments, and English Language Learners (ELL).
School districts may also use these models internally, employing weighted or profile-based systems to determine how funds are distributed at the school level. This flexibility allows districts to adjust their budgeting to local needs, ensuring principals have the autonomy to direct resources where they are most needed.
However, a student’s needs might not always align perfectly with their assigned code. For example, two students with a visual impairment code might need vastly different levels of support. One might require special tools like Braille books or technology, while the other might only need minor accommodations. The one-size-fits-all approach to coding can overlook these nuances, making it difficult to allocate resources equitably.
Some jurisdictions, like the state of Maryland with its Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, have taken the Weighted Student Model a step further by requiring that a specific percentage of funds "follow the student." In these cases, districts must directly allocate a percentage of the funding generate by students at a school, to supports within that school.
This approach is intending to increase transparency and accountability, ensuring that the resources assigned to a student are actually used to support that student's success. Districts under this framework will be tasked with determining how to allocate supports provided from District staff and to create a cost allocation framework.
Some jurisdictions opt for a profile-based funding model, which uses census or demographic data to allocate funds based on the characteristics of the community rather than individual students. This approach aims to provide schools with resources aligned to broader community needs, such as high rates of medical interventions, poverty or large numbers of refuges and ELL students.
While the Weighted Student Model offers a more equitable way of distributing funds that a simple base funding approach, it does come with challenges. First, assigning codes to students and distributing funds based on those codes can be complex. As noted, not all students with the same code require the same level of support, making it difficult to fairly allocate resources solely by using these codes.
Second, there is always the concern of whether targeted funding is enough to cover the actual costs of supporting students. Some schools may be underfunded if the formula doesn’t fully capture the unique needs of their student body.
Finally, while the model strives to increase equity, it also requires districts and schools to carefully monitor how funds are spent and whether they are effectively meeting the needs of students. This can increase administrative burdens, pulling resources away from the classroom.
As school districts strive to allocate resources in the most effective and equitable manner, many turn to the Weighted Student Model. This approach directs funding based on the specific needs of students, ensuring that those who require additional supports, such as special education services or language learning assistance, receive adequate resources. Implementing a Weighted Student Model requires thoughtful planning and data-driven decision-making. Here’s a suggested process on how to successfully implement a Weighted Student Model in a school district.
The first step in creating a Weighted Student Model is identifying the factors and student groups that require additional costs and supports. These can include:
Working closely with school principals, teachers, and support staff, the district should build a comprehensive list of needs that go beyond what is provided in a standard classroom environment. This inventory will serve as the foundation for determining how much additional funding these students will need.
Once the key needs are identified, the next step is to define the support standards for each student group. This involves determining what services or interventions are required for a student to thrive academically and socially. For example, for students with visual impairments, the standard might include access to assistive technologies or specialist teaching staff.
After defining these standards, calculate the relative cost of supporting these students under the support standard compared to a student who only requires a regular classroom environment. This cost calculation will serve as the basis for assigning weights to each group of students. A student with special education needs, for example, might have a weight of 1.5 or 2 times that of a typical student, reflecting the higher costs of providing tailored support.
To ensure accurate funding distribution, it’s crucial to have reliable data on student needs. Developing a data collection system that tracks factors such as special education codes, ELL status, and other relevant indicators is essential.
Districts can use a variety of tools to gather and manage this data, including:
Collecting this data consistently ensures the model accurately reflects the needs of the student population.
Once you have identified the needs, established standards, and gathered data, you can develop an allocation formula. This formula will distribute funds or staffing levels based on the weights assigned to different student groups.
For example, the formula might allocate $5,000 per typical student and $15,000 for a student with special education needs, reflecting their weighted value. However, the formula must also be tested for sustainability. Ensure that the total funding allocated by the model aligns with the available budget. If the formula demands more funding than the district has, adjustments will be necessary to balance equity with fiscal responsibility.
Developing a weighted funding model and ensuring its sustainability can be a complex task. Spreadsheets may be able to model out how the model will function, but can be challenging to make adjustments to the model and to determine what the impact of changes will be. Spreadsheets also pose challenges in rolling out the model to all of the budget decisions makers in the organization and to consolidate their input and decisions on how the allocation is to be utilized.
Budget systems provide an alternative to spreadsheets and enable better collaboration in the budget process. Unlike other budgeting systems that only provide a handful of simple ways to allocate funds, MyBudgetFile with its powerful and accessible calculation engine, enables District leaders to easily develop complex calculations, allocation models and to see the impact of changes play out in real time.
One critical decision is whether the funding will be flexible or targeted. Flexible funding allows schools to determine how they allocate resources, giving them autonomy to meet their unique challenges. For example, a school principal may decide to allocate more resources toward additional teaching assistants, depending on local needs.
Alternatively, targeted funding requires funds to be directed to specific areas, such as hiring a special education teacher or purchasing assistive technology. Targeted funding provides more consistency but limits flexibility. Finding a balance between autonomy and accountability is key to ensuring schools can meet student needs effectively.
Accountability is a crucial aspect of the Weighted Student Model. School districts need to track how allocated funds are spent, especially when they are targeted toward specific needs or interventions. Tracking mechanisms could include regular financial reports, audits, or software that monitors resource allocation and usage.
Beyond tracking financials, it’s also vital to measure whether these expenditures translate into improved student success. Establish key performance indicators (KPIs) to assess progress, such as graduation rates, test scores, or the achievement of Individualized Education Plan (IEP) goals. This helps ensure that resources are being used effectively to support student learning.
Education is dynamic, and student needs can shift from year to year. To ensure that the Weighted Student Model remains relevant and effective, school districts should establish regular feedback mechanisms. This could involve:
Using this feedback, the district can adjust the allocation formula each year. Whether it’s rebalancing weights, adjusting funding for new challenges, or recalibrating support standards, flexibility in the model is critical to meeting evolving needs.
The Weighted Student Model represents a shift towards a more needs-based approach to school funding, ensuring that resources are allocated based on the needs of students rather than treating all schools or students equally. While it offers more flexibility and a chance to target support where it’s most needed, challenges remain in ensuring the system is fair, accurate, and reflective of the true cost of supporting students. By understanding these complexities, school districts and policymakers can continue refining the model to provide the best possible outcomes for all students.
Implementing a Weighted Student Model is a thoughtful process that requires balancing equity, flexibility, and fiscal responsibility. By following these steps—developing an inventory of student needs, determining support standards and costs, collecting data, creating a sustainable formula, deciding on funding flexibility, tracking expenditures, and making regular adjustments—school districts can allocate resources effectively to improve student success. Regular reflection and refinement are crucial to ensuring that the model adapts to the needs of both the students and the district over time.
About the Author
Ryan is a Director of Client Success with MyBudgetFile, a leader in K-12 budgeting across North America. With School Business experience spanning small to large school districts, he has served as President of the Alberta ASBO and led provincial initiatives on financial reporting, school fees and funding. Holding a Chartered Professional Accountant designation and an MBA in Public Policy and Administration from the University of Alberta, Ryan is passionate about the School Business Official’s role in making a difference for students and in their community as a whole.