Charleston schools shift weighted student funding to per‑pupil method; district proposes larger FY‑26 allocation

Charleston County School District leaders told the board on Feb. 24 they will recommend changing the weighted student funding (WSF) distribution method from a ratio‑based approach to a clearer per‑pupil allocation for FY‑26 and to increase the overall WSF investment next year.

Superintendent Huggins said the district will move to a per‑pupil allocation to make funding more transparent for schools. “We’re going to a per pupil allocation, recommending that for the FY 26 school year,” Huggins said. Under the new method, the total WSF investment for the current fiscal year — $32.8 million — was divided by the number of unique pupils in the targeted categories to derive an investment per pupil ($1,353.60 in the presentation), then weights were applied for students with disabilities, pupils in poverty and multilingual learners.

Chief financial officer/executive staff (Mr. Prentice) explained the mechanics: the district assigned weights so that a student who fits multiple categories (for example, a multilingual learner and a pupil in poverty) would receive combined weighting. “We took the total investment in weighted student funding this fiscal year, which is the $32,800,000 and divided into that the number of unique pupils that fit into those 3 categories to come up with an investment per pupil,” Prentice said. The proposed FY‑26 budget assumes an approximate $36.1 million total WSF commitment, with an appropriation (the amount likely to be budgeted) estimated at about $33 million because of expected savings from lapsed salaries and other factors.

Why it matters: district leaders said the per‑pupil approach ensures smaller schools and those with few students in a category still receive funding, and it provides principals predictable amounts earlier so they can plan staff and interventions. Board members asked for additional transparency and requested the district provide the breakdown of unique pupils in each category and examples showing how funding flows to schools.

Board discussion and follow‑up: Trustees asked about the weights (0.85 for students with disabilities, 0.7 for pupils in poverty, 1.0 for multilingual learners) and why some weights are fractional; Prentice said the district ran multiple models and adjusted weights to balance equity given that the pupils‑in‑poverty category is the largest and often overlaps with other categories. Dr. Temple proposed creating a possible fourth category for students who are academically struggling but who do not fit the three listed criteria; district staff said they would discuss that idea at cabinet and consider it further.

The district also said WSF allocations will be based on the 45‑day average daily membership (ADM) for the applicable budget year and that staff made manual adjustments for openings and rezoning where necessary. The board will see more detailed budget materials and a five‑year forecast at upcoming workshops.