Number Weighting Remedies

There are three basic approaches to re-leveling the playing field that has been tilted by "number weighting" in favor of a few big school districts and against all smaller districts.

Eliminate Number Weighting but Hold Large Districts Harmless. Eliminate number weighting altogether and distribute funds using a formula that is weighted only on the percentage of disadvantaged students in a district. Provide a supplemental grant to large districts that lose funding as a result, to assure that they do not suffer a loss of funding of more than 10%. Phase out the supplement in 5 years.

Bracket Reform: Alter the weights given some or all brackets, or alter the bracket intervals (click here to see how the brackets are set up). For example,

  1. Lower the weight given to each student in the higher number weighting brackets. That gives a lower student count to larger districts and reduces their share of the Title I funding.
  2. Expand the number weighting brackets so that more students are counted in the lower brackets with the lower weights. That decreases the proportion of students in large districts that weighted in higher brackets with the higher rates.
  3. Increase the weight given to students placed in the three upper percentage weighting brackets in the 95% of districts that have fewer than 2,250 formula students.

Retain Number Weighting but Limit Its Use to Districts with High Percentage of Disadvantaged Students: For example, number weighting could only be available to districts that place students in at least the first three of the percentage weighting brackets (i.e., districts with at least 22% disadvantaged students). This would actually further concentrate the benefits of number weighting among a very few districts, and much of the savings would not go to the districts currently harmed by number weighting. To offset this, it would be necessary to lower the weight in the upper number weighting brackets to distribute more of the savings to smaller district.