In 2012, the McCleary case ruling by Washington's Supreme Court significantly centralized school funding to re-equalize basic education access for all students. To understand the impact of the reform on school district finance, we examine changes in Washington school district revenues over 2004–2021. We document that the reform increased total district resources and the share of state funding for all districts rather than for disadvantaged districts alone. We also observe a decline in the use of local revenues by districts. Taken together, the results suggest that funding equity improvements in Washington were achieved through more abundant state revenue assistance and through the flattening of local levies, with prospectively stronger negative effects of the policy change on the local revenues of wealthier school districts over time.
BrennanGeoffreyBuchananJames M.. 1980. The Power to Tax: Analytical Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3.
CandelariaChristopher A.ShoresKenneth A.. 2019. “Court-ordered Finance Reforms in the Adequacy era: Heterogeneous Causal Effects and Sensitivity.” Education Finance and Policy14 (1): 31–60. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00236
FujiokaKendall J.KnightDavid S.. 2025. “McCleary at Twelve: Examining Policy Designs Following Court-Mandated School Finance Reform in Washington State.” Working paper. Retrieved from https://edworkingpapers.com/sites/default/files/ai25-1191.pdf
9.
GuarinoCassandra M.SantibanezLucreciaDaleyGlenn A.. 2006. “Teacher Recruitment and Retention: A Review of the Recent Empirical Literature.” Review of Educational Research76 (2): 173–208. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002173
10.
HanushekEric. A.Joyce-WirtzMatthew. 2023. “Incidence and Outcomes of School Finance Litigation: 1968–2021.” Public Finance Review51 (6): 748–781. https://doi.org/10.1177/10911421231190964
11.
HomsyGeorge C.WarnerMildred E.. 2015. “Cities and Sustainability: Polycentric Action and Multilevel Governance.” Urban Affairs Review51 (1): 46–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087414530545
12.
HoxbyCaroline M.2001. “All School Finance Equalizations are not Created Equal.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics116 (4): 1189–1231. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301753265552
13.
HymanJoshua. 2017. “Does Money Matter in the Long run? Effects of School Spending on Educational Attainment.” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy9 (4): 256–280. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20150249
14.
JacksonKirabo C.JohnsonRucker C.PersicoClaudia. 2016. “The Effects of School Spending on Educational and Economic Outcomes: Evidence from School Finance Reforms.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics131 (1): 157–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjv036
15.
JohnsonSusan Moore. 2006. “The Workplace Matters: Teacher Quality, Retention, and Effectiveness.” Working Paper. National Education Association. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED495822.pdf
16.
JoondephBradley W.1995. “The Good, the bad, and the Ugly: An Empirical Analysis of Litigation-Prompted School Finance Reform.” Santa Clara Law Review35 (3): 763–824.
17.
KenyonDaphneMunteanuSemida. 2022. “Effects of Reducing the Role of the Local Property Tax in Funding K-12 Education.” In Recent Advancements in Education Finance and Policy (Chapter 5), edited by KilleenKieran M.DownesThomas, 133–172. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Incorporated.
18.
LafortuneJulienRothsteinJesseSchanzenbachDiane Whitmore. 2018. “School Finance Reform and the Distribution of Student Achievement.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics10 (2): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20160567
19.
LoebSusannaPageMarianne. 2000. “Examining the Link Between Teacher Wages and Student Outcomes: The Importance of Alternative Labor Market Opportunities and non-Pecuniary Variation.” The Review of Economics and Statistics82 (3): 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465300558894
20.
ManwaringRobertSheffrinSteven. 1997. “Litigation, School Finance Reform, and aggregate Educational Spending.” International Tax and Public Finance4 (2): 107–127. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008661519528
21.
McCleary v. State, 173 Wn.2d 477, 269 P.3d 277. 2012.
22.
MurnaneRichard J.OlsenRandall J.. 1990. “The Effects of Salaries and Opportunity Costs on Length of Stay in Teaching: Evidence from North Carolina.” Journal Of Human Resources25 (1): 106–124.
23.
Nguyen-HoangPhuong. 2025. “Local Autonomy in Education Finance in a Mixed Economy: The Case of Vietnam.” Public Finance Review53 (2): 226–261. https://doi.org/10.1177-10911421241245771
PleckiMargaret.2000. “Washington’s School Finance Reform: Moderate Success and the Need for Improvement.” Journal of Education Finance25 (4): 565–582. https://doi.org/10.2307/40691081
26.
RambachanAsheshRothJonathan. 2023. “A More Credible Approach to Parallel Trends.” Review of Economic Studies90 (5): 2555–2591. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdad018
Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186. Kentucky Supreme Court. 1989.
29.
RothbartMichah W.2020. “Does School Finance Reform Reduce the Race Gap in School Funding?.” Education Finance and Policy15 (4): 675–707. https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00282
30.
RowanBrianCorrentiRichardMillerRobert J.. 2002. “What Large-Scale, Survey Research Tells us About Teacher Effects on Student Achievement: Insights from the Prospects Study of Elementary Schools.” Teachers College Record104 (8): 1525–1567.
31.
RubensteinRossBallalSonaliStiefelLeannaSchwartzAmy Ellen. 2008. “Equity and Accountability: The Impact of State Accountability Systems on School Finance.” Public Budgeting and Finance28 (3): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5850.2008.00908.x
32.
SandersWilliam L.RiversJune C.. 1996. Cumulative and Residual Effects Of Teachers on Future Student Academic Achievement. Knoxville, YN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
33.
Seattle School District No. 1 v. State, 90 Wn.2d 476, 585 P.2d 71. 1978.
34.
Seattle School District v. State. 1983. Bench Trial Court Ruling.
SunMinCandelariaChristopher A.KnightDavidLeClairZacharyKabourekSarah E.ChangKatherine. 2024. “The Effects and Local Implementation of School Finance Reforms on Teacher Salary, Hiring, and Turnover.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis47 (2): 380–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/07352162231205253
37.
TheobaldNeil D.HannaFaith. 1991. “Ample Provision for Whom? The Evolution of State Control Over School Finance in Washington.” Journal of Education Finance17 (1): 7–32.
38.
TheobaldNeil D.PicusLawrence O.. 1991. “Living with Equal Amounts of Less: Experiences of States with Primarily State-Funded School Systems.” Journal of Education Finance17 (1): 1–6.
39.
ThompsonDavid C.CramptonFaith E.. 2000. “The Impact of School Finance Litigation.” Educational Considerations28 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4148/0146-9282.1299
ZimmerRonJonesJohn T.. 2005. “Unintended Consequence of Centralized Public School Funding in Michigan Education.” Southern Economic Journal71 (3): 534–544. https://doi.org/10.2307/20062058
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
