Progressively phase in concentration grants for newly eligible districts to mitigate the funding cliff¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 1 claim (1 for) · 1 study (1 review), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description¶

The report recommends lowering concentration-grant eligibility (for example, to districts enrolling more than 45% high-need students) while progressively increasing grants so funding "gradually ratchet up to reach funding levels currently allocated to K–12 school districts with more than 55% enrollment of students with greater needs." Figure 7 illustrates this with hypothetical 10,000-student districts, adding new concentration funding that increases gradually between 46% and 55% unduplicated pupil percentages. This addresses the funding cliff where districts just below the threshold receive significantly less funding.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Additional state and local tax revenue to fund newly eligible districts' grants
• Policymaker decisions on the appropriate eligibility threshold and the graduation rate of grants along the continuum of need

Constraints¶

• The report notes lowering the threshold requires considering how much it would cost
• Increasing the base grant, an alternative, would not improve equity as much as targeted supplemental or concentration funding

Target Learners¶

• Students with additional needs in California districts currently ineligible for concentration grants

Target Learning Goals¶

• Equitable funding for high-need students regardless of district threshold position

Claims¶

• Achievement gains lag in districts just below the 55% concentration-grant threshold, especially those enrolling 40–55% high-need students [+W]

Related Strategies¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Kaplan, J. (2025). California's Local Control Funding Formula: Next steps toward equity. Learning Policy Institute. https://doi.org/10.54300/820.131