In Part I, we discussed the important role the US Department of Education (DOE) plays in funding, collecting, and disseminating data related to education. In this post, we’re going to talk about the DOE’s role in providing funding for K-12 education.
image via givelively.org
Federal education funding is distributed to states and school districts through various formulas (such as population and percentage of students in poverty) and competitive grant programs. The amount the federal government provides varies considerably from state to state. In some states the federal share of total elementary and secondary education spending is less than 5 percent of the total, while in other states it is higher than 16 percent. This funding provides critical support for programs designed to improve teacher quality, close achievement gaps, and encourage innovation. By far the most spending goes to Title I funds for high-poverty schools ($18 billion a year), special education funding ($15 billion a year), and Pell Grants ($28 billion a year) which are used for higher education.
In providing Title I funding, the DOE supports schools with high concentrations of low-income students, aiming to level the playing field and provide opportunities for success to all students. The premise here is one that is widely recognized: students from impoverished backgrounds have greater needs than those from wealthy backgrounds. The first rule of equity is to provide more resources to those with greater need. Similarly, the DOE provides guidance, resources, and technical assistance to schools and districts to support the inclusion and success of students with special needs. The DOE also provides critical oversight for the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which requires that students with disabilities be given a high-quality, free education, adapted the their needs, in the least restrictive environment possible. Accepting special education funding from the DOE means that in return for those monies, the school agrees to abide by the requirements laid out by the federal government. Taking federal money requires the quid pro quo of following federal guidelines for equity, access, staffing, best practices, and so on, but also provides the resources for doing so. Unlike private schools, public schools don’t get to choose who they educate; funding from the DOE supports schools in their mission to educate everyone.
It’s not that this is an inconsiderable amount of money — it is. But most people don’t realize that the federal government doesn’t provide quite as much funding as they think. As of 2024, the federal government provided $119.1 billion to K-12 schools nationwide, or $2,400 per pupil. However, the per-pupil expenditure nationwide is $17,280, so the majority of public school funding is coming from state and local tax revenues rather than from Uncle Sam. In fact, Federal public education funding is equivalent to just 0.51% of total taxpayer income. As a proportion of the entire federal budget, K-12 education spending (i.e. not including Pell Grants) added up to 1.5% in 2024.
What’s interesting is this: Gallup reported in 2016 that most Americans were opposed to eliminating the Department of Education by a margin of 45 points (63%-18%). You might think that the pandemic and increased politicization around education must have driven people today to desire its elimination. You would be wrong. In March 2024, AP-NORC reported that a strong majority of Americans (65% — more than the 2016 poll) said the federal government was spending too little on education.* Just 12% said the government was spending too much. Even among the Republicans surveyed, 52% said the federal government should spend more on education.**
image via studentaid.gov
I think a word about Pell grants is in order here, even though they don’t fall under the umbrella of K-12 education funding. The Pell grant program makes up the lion’s share of spending from the DOE — almost as much money as the other two funding streams combined. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported that 32% of undergraduate students received Pell Grants in 2021-22. That’s a third of all undergrads. And since the Pell is a needs-based grant, those who do get it truly need the money to further their education. Because Pell grants remove a major barrier to higher education and relieve a critical stressor for those in undergraduate programs, its overall effect is to expand access to college (which boosts college enrollment), reduce drop-out rates (because kids can afford to stay), and improve student outcomes (i.e. better grades because they’re not stressing about finances). Why should we care about this? There’s a lot of research demonstrating that an educated populace brings with it a host of benefits to the U.S. as a whole: economic benefits in the form of higher employment rates and more taxes paid over a lifetime; less crime; better health outcomes and therefore less stress on our healthcare systems; reduced poverty which results in less dependence on public assistance; smarter, healthier, higher-achieving children; and greater advances in research and development across a range of disciplines, brought about by more minds available to undertake this work. There’s also some interesting research that shows people with more education tend to be more generous toward those less fortunate than they are, a benefit that deserves wider recognition. Those with college degrees are more likely to volunteer and more likely to donate money to charitable causes than those without.*** This makes the Pell Grant Program a case of targeted spending that benefits recipients in the short run and the entire nation in the long run.^^
Eliminating the DOE wouldn’t necessarily eliminate all this funding — programs would likely have to be moved under the auspices of a different department. But eliminating the DOE isn’t the only goal for the nay-sayers. They also have their sights set on Title I, one of the DOE’s most important programs. We’re going to discuss that next.
__________________________________________________________________
*They are probably correct. The U.S. dedicates about 12% of public funding to education, below the minimum of 15% set by UNESCO. When compared with countries like Luxembourg, which spends between 22,000 – 27,000USD per pupil, the U.S.’s $17,280 per pupil looks a tad paltry, especially when we recognize that spending varies widely depending on state and that $17,280 is by no means a guarantee. (Note: the 17K figure isn’t stable — it varies depending on the source you’re looking at).
**I mention this only because the elimination of the DOE has been an omnipresent Republican campaign talking point for about 40 years. See Part 1 for more on this. AP-NORC specifically noted Republican responses as a subset, I think to show that this was a general consensus.
***This difference is marked. Gallup reported in 2023 that the more education a person has, the greater the chance they will donate money to a charitable cause — 38% of high school graduates donate versus 77% of those with graduate degrees. Volunteerism rates show an even more striking difference: 14% of non-college-goers, 27% of those with some postsecondary education or an associate’s degree, 38% of those with bachelor’s degrees, and 47% of those with graduate degrees.
^^Why doesn’t this get more recognition? Because the long-term is pretty long — 20+ years to see all the effects. Most politicians and policy makers don’t have the patience for those kinds of results. They’re hard to demonstrate in a 2-, 4-, or 6-year election cycle.