Board briefed on state momentum for weighted student funding and potential budget impacts

Buncombe County Schools leaders told the Board of Education on March 13 that North Carolina may move toward a weighted student funding model and that such a change could materially affect district budgets.

Superintendent Dr. Jackson and Chief Financial Officer Tina Thorpe described the state discussion and said models adopted elsewhere required large increases in base funding to work as intended. "If we simply change the formula without adding the funding, then we risk actually losing funding," Jackson said, summarizing lessons staff heard from Tennessee and Mississippi.

Thorpe explained weighted student funding as a formula that begins with a base per-pupil amount and adds weights for students with additional needs—examples include economically disadvantaged students and tiers within special education. Staff noted 41 states now use student-based funding and that North Carolina is one of the few that does not.

Examples and cautions: The district highlighted Tennessee’s transition (adopted 2022, implemented 2023-24) and Mississippi’s more rapid rollout (adopted April 2024, implemented July 2024). Presenters said both states increased total funding when they switched: Tennessee added roughly $1 billion to its base funding and Mississippi added about $240 million, according to the presentation staff shared with the board. Staff emphasized the need to raise the base funding in parallel with any weighting change.

Data and administrative burden: Officials said effective implementation requires improved data collection to describe student needs precisely. Dr. Jackson noted a superintendent from another state reported their district was initially underfunded because it had not submitted the level of student data the formula required. Board members asked how the formula would identify economically disadvantaged students; staff said potential metrics include direct certification, free-and-reduced-price meal data and Census statistics but that specifics would be determined by state legislation or rule.

Transition protections and timing: Staff said some states used hold-harmless periods (one or more years) to protect districts that could lose funding from abrupt transitions. The timeline in North Carolina is uncertain, staff said, but they flagged the issue as a potential game changer for the district’s 2025-26 budget planning if legislation moves in the long session.

Ending: Board members asked about annual data frequency and how budget volatility from events such as hurricanes would be handled. Staff recommended continued engagement with state stakeholders and monitoring of proposed bills so the district can adjust budgeting assumptions and data processes if the state moves forward.