Washington's Prototypical Funding Formula
Bellevue School District
Funding Formula Breakdown for 2024-25
What is the Prototypical School Funding Model?
Following the McCleary decision in 2012, Washington State adopted the Prototypical School Funding Model to fully fund "Basic Education" as required by the state constitution.
"Prototypical School"
Based on Enrollment
= Allocation Amount
District Enrollment
1 Prototypical School Sizes
Theoretical enrollment for each school type:
| School Type | Grade Levels | Prototypical Enrollment (AAFTE) |
|---|---|---|
| Elementary School | Grades K-6 | 400 students |
| Middle School | Grades 7-8 | 432 students |
| High School | Grades 9-12 | 600 students |
AAFTE = Annual Average Full-Time Equivalent Students
2 Class Size Ratios (Students per Teacher)
Number of students allocated per certificated instructional staff (teacher):
| Grade Level | Class Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Kindergarten | 17.00 | K-3 Class Size Reduction |
| Grade 1 | 17.00 | |
| Grade 2 | 17.00 | |
| Grade 3 | 17.00 | |
| Grade 4 | 27.00 | General |
| Grades 5-6 | 27.00 | General |
| Grades 7-8 | 28.53 | General |
| Grades 9-12 | 28.74 | General |
| Lab Science | 19.98 | Specialized |
| CTE / Skill Center | 19.00 | Career & Technical Education |
Example: 200 K-3 students → 200 ÷ 17 = 11.76 FTE teachers
3 Salary Allocations - Bellevue School District
2024-25 Base Salary Allocations
| Staff Type | State Base | × Regional (1.18) | = District Allocation | FTE Count | Total Allocation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Certificated Instructional Staff (CIS) | $78,134 | ×1.18 | $92,198 | 1,411.4 | $130.1M |
| Certificated Administrative Staff (CAS) | $116,012 | ×1.18 | $136,894 | 91.0 | $12.5M |
| Classified Staff (CLS) | $56,105 | ×1.18 | $66,204 | 848.3 | $56.2M |
| Total Staff Salary Allocation: | $198.8M | ||||
4 MSOC - Bellevue School District
Non-personnel operating cost allocations (2024-25):
| Category | Per-Student | × 19,509 Students | = District Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technology | $201.02 | × | $3.9M |
| Utilities & Maintenance | $412.89 | × | $8.1M |
| Curriculum & Textbooks | $173.81 | × | $3.4M |
| Instructional Supplies | $277.59 | × | $5.4M |
| Other (Library, Office, Insurance) | $449.28 | × | $8.8M |
| Total MSOC | $1,514.59 | $29.5M |
5 Total Funding Summary: Bellevue School District
| Component | Amount |
|---|---|
| Actual Salary Revenue (CIS + CAS + CLS) | $198.8M |
| Employee Benefits (SEBB) | $37.0M |
| MSOC (Materials, Supplies, Operating Costs) | $29.5M |
| Special Education | $38.8M |
| Transportation | $12.6M |
| Total State Funding | $260.2M |
| Per Student | $13,338 |
Key Takeaways
Funding is based on theoretical "prototypical" schools, not actual district needs or costs.
Districts receive funding based on the formula but have discretion in how to deploy resources.
Special education, transportation, and MSOC are chronically underfunded compared to actual costs.
Regionalization factors only partially account for cost-of-living differences across the state.
Many districts rely on local levies to cover gaps, creating inequities between property-rich and property-poor districts.
References & Resources
- RCW 28A.150.260 - Prototypical School Funding Statute
- Citizen's Guide to WA K-12 Finance 2024
- K-12 Regionalization Factors
- OSPI School Apportionment
- District Allocation of State Resources Portal
District Overview
Washington schools collectively face a $2+ billion gap between what the state allocates and what districts actually spend. Here's how that shows up in your district — and what you can do about it.
Where Does School Money Come From?
Basic ed, special ed, transportation, and more
Extracurricular programs, student support services, classroom materials, and staff positions not fully funded by the state
Services for low-income students, multilingual/English learners, educator training, and more
Investment earnings, fees, donations, and miscellaneous revenue sources
Data Source: OSPI SAFS Data Files
Revenue Source Trend
Year-over-year revenue source breakdown for the selected district. Data source: OSPI F-196 Financial Reports.
Your District at a Glance
Funding Gap Breakdown
Revenue vs. Expenditure by program (in millions)
State Funding by District Demographics
How does state revenue per student vary with district characteristics?
Reform Simulator: What If WA Changed the Formula?
Adjust policy parameters to see how different reforms would impact your district's funding.
Funding Simulator
See how policy changes would affect your district.
Why is your district underfunded right now?
Six policy gaps in WA's K-12 funding formula cost districts money. Here's how much each one shorts your district per student per year. Bars sorted by impact — biggest gap on top.
Each bar maps to a specific WA bill. ✓ = passed in 2025 (phasing in). Others need 2026 legislation.
Funding Gap Analysis
Y = Funding Gap Overview
Negative Y = district spends more than state provides — local levies, federal grants, or reserves cover the gap.
Positive Y = state revenue covers all spending (rare; usually small / low-cost districts).
Note: this differs from the "State allocation vs. program cost" gap in the District Overview tab.
Your district's input profile
Each tile is one factor the model uses. The small percentage = how much that factor influences the predicted funding balance across WA districts.
▸Methodology & model accuracy
Which factors most predict the funding gap?
Bars below rank how strongly each factor moves the predicted funding balance, learned from 6 years × 250+ districts. Correlation, not causation — a factor at the top doesn't mean changing it would close the gap.
Feature Importance Summary
▸What's XGBoost? How is the model trained?
What is XGBoost?
XGBoost (eXtreme Gradient Boosting) is a machine learning algorithm that builds many decision trees sequentially, where each tree learns from the errors of previous trees. It's widely used for prediction tasks due to its accuracy and efficiency.
What We're Predicting (Y)
This is the funding balance per pupil. Negative = district spends more than the state provides (the gap is covered by local levies, federal grants, or reserves). Positive = state revenue exceeds district spending (rare).
Input Features (X)
Data Filtering
To ensure meaningful comparisons, the model excludes:
- Small districts with fewer than 100 students
- Special/charter schools (tribal, detention, virtual, academy, etc.)
Feature Importance (Gain-based)
Feature importance shows how much each variable contributes to the model's predictions. Higher importance means the feature has more influence on determining a district's funding balance.
How to Interpret Results
Underfunded — The district spends $2,500 more per pupil than what the state provides. This gap must be covered by local levies or other sources.
Surplus — The state provides $500 more per pupil than what the district spends. This is rare and usually indicates lower-cost operations.
District Clustering: Funding Gap vs Profile
▸How are the 4 clusters defined?
What is District Clustering?
District clustering groups Washington's school districts into 4 categories based on two dimensions: Funding Balance (Y-axis) and District Profile Score (X-axis). This helps identify which districts face similar challenges and funding situations.
Understanding the Axes
Formula: (State Revenue − Expenditure) ÷ Enrollment
Negative values = state revenue under district spend (gap covered by levies / federal / reserves)
Positive values = state revenue exceeds district spend (rare)
Composite score (0-100%) based on:
• 40% Low-Income %
• 20% Enrollment Decline
• 20% ELL % • 20% SpEd %
The Four Clusters
Bottom 2.5% of funding balance. These districts face the most severe funding shortfalls regardless of demographics. Priority for policy intervention.
Below-median funding with challenging demographics (high poverty, ELL, SpEd). These districts need both more funding and targeted support programs.
Below-median funding but with favorable demographics. Often suburban districts that rely heavily on local levies to cover the gap.
Above-median funding balance. State revenue covers most expenditures. Often smaller rural districts with lower operating costs.
Key Insights
- High-need districts are not always the most underfunded — some receive adequate state support through categorical funding
- Suburban districts often show larger gaps — higher costs but limited categorical funding eligibility
- Enrollment decline amplifies funding challenges — fixed costs spread over fewer students
- Local levy capacity varies dramatically — property-rich districts can compensate, others cannot
Bills That Affect Your School's Funding
The 2026 supplemental session kept most of the big 2025 K-12 wins in place, but didn't add major new funding. Below are the recent bills that matter — what's now law, and what's still being decided.
Need your legislator's email? Find them here ↗Sources & Further Reading
Writing a school project on K-12 funding? These are the primary sources behind the numbers on this dashboard — go ahead and cite them.
Citing one of these in a paper? The WA Citizen's Guide PDF includes a glossary and timeline that makes excellent reference material. fiscal.wa.gov is the dataset behind most of the dollar figures on this dashboard.
