=========> string(69007) "
Key Findings

See the Survey Methodology and Data Sources, Screening Questions, and Questionnaire and Topline Results at www.iowaace.org/resources

For media inquiries, contact Nick Boeyink, nboeyink@ls2group.com

 

Overview

Iowa awards the fifth-most tax-credit scholarships in the nation, behind Florida, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. Iowa’s School Tuition Organization Tax Credit Program, a tax-credit scholarship facilitating nonprofits in providing scholarships to attend private schools, was enacted and launched in 2006. While starting off modestly with less than 200 students using scholarships in its first year, the program has grown significantly over the years—in large part due to legislative updates increasing the number of Iowa students eligible to receive a scholarship—and had 143 participating private schools enrolling 12,538 scholarship recipients as of the conclusion of the 2019–20 school year.2

The purpose of the Iowa K–12 & School Choice Survey is to measure public opinion on, and in some cases awareness or knowledge of, a range of K–12 education topics and school choice reforms. EdChoice and the Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education developed this project in partnership with Braun Research, Inc., which conducted the online interviews and live phone call interviews, collected the survey data, and provided data quality control.

We explore the following topics and questions:

Methods & Data

The Iowa K–12 & School Choice Survey project, funded and developed by EdChoice in partnership with the Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education and conducted by Braun Research, Inc., interviewed a statistically representative statewide sample of Iowa voters (age 18+). Data collection methods consisted of a non-probability-based opt-in online panel and probability sampling and random-digit dial for telephone. The unweighted statewide sample includes a total of 500 online interviews and 500 live phone interviews completed in English from December 14–29, 2020. The margin of sampling error for the total statewide sample is ±3.1 percentage points.

The statewide sample was weighted using population parameters from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2018 tables for voters living in the state of Iowa. Results were weighted on age, race, ethnicity, gender, region, and party ID. Weighting based on party affiliation used 2014 data from Pew.

Ground Rules

Before discussing the survey results, we want to provide some brief ground rules for reporting statewide sample and demographic subgroup responses in this brief. For each survey topic, there is a sequence for describing various analytical frames. We note the raw response levels for the statewide sample on a given question. Then we consider the statewide sample’s margin, noting differences between positive and negative responses. If we detect statistical significance on a given item, then we briefly report demographic results and differences. We do not infer causality with any of the observations in this brief. Aside from the demographic tables in the appendices, we do not use specific subgroup findings if there were fewer than 50 respondents.

Explicit subgroup comparisons/differences are statistically significant with 95 percent confidence, unless otherwise clarified in the narrative. We orient any listing of subgroups’ margins around more/less “likely” to respond one way or the other, usually emphasizing the propensity to be more/less positive. Subgroup comparisons are meant to be suggestive for further exploration and research beyond this project.

Findings

Tax-Credit Scholarships

 

Tax-credit scholarships allow taxpayers to receive full or partial tax credits when they donate to nonprofits that provide private school scholarships. In Iowa, taxpayers eligible for school tuition organization (STO) tax credits include individuals as well as businesses subject to the state’s corporate income tax.  In some states, scholarship-giving nonprofits also provide innovation grants to public schools and/or transportation assistance to students who choose non-residentially assigned public schools. As of January 2021, there are 23 operating tax-credit scholarship programs in 18 states with nearly 330,000 scholarships awarded in the most recent school year.3 Of the current school parents who responded to the survey, 65 percent had never heard of Iowa’s tax-credit scholarship program and 27 percent had heard of the program but did not apply.

School Tuition Tax Credit Program

Iowans are more than twice as likely to favor the School Tuition Tax Credit Program than they are to oppose it. More than two-thirds of respondents (68%) said they supported the tax credit program after being given a description, whereas 28 percent said they oppose. The margin is +40 percentage points. Iowans are more likely to express an intensely positive response compared with a negative response (24% “strongly favor” vs. 13% “strongly oppose”).

An initial question asked for an opinion of tax-credit scholarships without offering any description. On this baseline question, 36 percent of respondents said they favored tax-credit scholarships, and 15 percent said they opposed them. In the follow-up question, respondents were given a description of the School Tuition Tax Credit Program. With this information, support increased 32 points to 68 percent, and opposition increased 13 points to 28 percent.

More than four of 10 Iowans (41%) said they had never heard of tax-credit scholarships on the baseline item gauging familiarity with this type of school choice program. The Iowa subgroups having the highest proportions saying they had never heard of tax-credit scholarships include: females (50%), those age 18 to 34 (47%), Millennials (47%), and lower-income respondents (47%).4

The margins of all subgroups observed are positive—and they all exceed +24 percentage points. The largest positive margins for the School Tuition Tax Credit program are among: Republicans (+56 points), Generation Z (+53 points), and low-income earners (+49 points). The subgroups exhibiting the lowest net positive margins for program favorability include Democrats (+24 points), the Silent Generation (+25 points), college graduates (+27 points), and high-income earners (+31 points).

In addition:

 

Tax-Credit Scholarship Cap Increase

 

Currently, there is a limit on the number of tax-credit scholarships available to Iowa students. Iowans are much more likely to favor increasing the cap on these tax-credit scholarships so more children can participate in the programs than they are to oppose it. Two-thirds of respondents (66%) said they supported increasing the cap on Iowa’s tax-credit scholarship program, whereas 28 percent said they oppose. The margin is +39 percentage points. Iowans are more likely to express an intensely positive response compared with a negative response (26% “strongly favor” vs. 10% “strongly oppose”).

The margins of all subgroups observed are positive—and they all exceed +15 percentage points. The largest positive margins for increasing the cap on tax-credit scholarships are among: those without a college degree (+57 points), low-income earners (+52 points), urbanites (+48 points), Generation Z (+48 points), and Democrats (+45 points). The subgroups exhibiting the lowest net positive margins for favorability of increasing the cap on tax-credit scholarships include the Silent Generation (+15 points), college graduates (+25 points), high-income earners (+30 points), and Independents (+33 points).

In addition:

 

Education Scholarship Accounts (ESAs)

 

Education Scholarship Accounts (ESAs) are currently active in five states and have been introduced in dozens more. ESAs allow parents to customize their child’s education. With ESAs, a portion of the state’s per-pupil education funding would be placed in a restricted-use account that a parent controls. The money could be used for things like private school tuition, online classes, curriculum, tutoring, and services for students with special needs.5

Iowans are more than twice as likely to support ESAs as they are to oppose them based on descriptive results. Almost two-thirds of respondents (67%) said they supported ESAs, whereas 27 percent said they oppose. The margin is +39 percentage points. Iowans are more likely to express an intensely positive response compared with a negative response (23% “strongly favor” vs. 13% “strongly oppose”).

An initial ESA question asked for an opinion without offering any description. On this baseline question, 43 percent of respondents said they favored an ESA system, with 16 percent saying they opposed. In the next question, respondents were given a description of a general ESA program. With this program-specific information, support increased 24 points to 67 percent, and opposition increased 12 points to 27 percent.

More than two out of three Iowans (35%) said they had never heard of ESAs on the baseline item. The subgroups having the highest proportions saying they had never heard of ESAs are: low-income earners (39%), females (38%), Millennials (38%), and those in the 18 to 34 age group (37%).

The margins of all subgroups observed are positive—and are at least +19 percentage points for all subgroups. The largest positive margins are among Generation Z (+62 points), suburban residents (+54 points), low-income earners (+52 points), and younger Iowans (+49 points). The subgroups exhibiting the lowest net positive margins for ESA favorability include those belonging to the Silent generation (+19 points), college graduates (+26 points), seniors (+35 points), and non-parents (+39 points).

In addition:

 

In a follow-up item, we learned the most common reasons for supporting ESAs are: “access to better academic environment” (30%); “more freedom and flexibility for parents” (25%); and “focus on more individual attention” (23%). Respondents opposed to ESAs answered a similar follow-up question. By far the most common reason for opposing this policy is the belief it would “divert funding away from public schools” (53%).

A subsequent split-sample experiment shows Iowans are inclined toward universal eligibility for ESAs rather than means-tested eligibility based solely on financial need. In the universal split, 66 percent of respondents said they agree with the statement that “ESAs should be available to all families, regardless of income and special needs.” About 30 percent “strongly agree” with that statement. Nearly one-third of Iowans (30%) disagree with that statement; 13 percent said they “strongly disagree.” In the comparison sample, needs-based split, respondents were asked if they agree with the statement, “ESAs should only be available to families based on financial need.” Respondents were evenly split with their views on that statement, with 47 percent saying they both agree and disagree with means-testing as an avenue for ESA eligibility. More respondents, though, strongly disagreed with means testing (22%) than strongly agreed with means testing (16%).

 

Current school parents (77%) were the most likely demographic to favor universal ESAs, followed by Gen Xers (75%), middle-aged Iowans (75%), urbanites (69%), and those without a college degree (69%). Those most likely to oppose universal ESAs were younger Iowans (36%), suburbanites (33%), college graduates (33%), Republicans (32%), females (32%), and middle-income earners (32%)

 

Public Charter Schools

 

Iowa enacted its charter school law in 2003, and public charter schools in the state may not be operated by for-profit entities.6 Respondents were asked two questions about charter schools, and Iowans express various levels of support them, both before and after given a description.

Interviewers first asked for an opinion without offering any description. On this baseline question, 38 percent of respondents said they favored charters, and 22 percent said they opposed them. In the follow-up question, respondents were given a general description of a charter school. With that information, support increased 21 points to 58 percent, and opposition increased nine points to 31 percent. The net margin of support for the descriptive question was large (+27 points).

Slightly more than one in five Iowa residents (21%) said they had never heard of charter schools on the baseline item. The subgroups having the highest proportions saying they had never heard of charter schools are Generation Z (29%), low-income earners (27%) younger Iowans (26%), and those without a college degree (26%),

The margins of all subgroups observed are positive—and they exceed at least +8 percentage points for all subgroups. The largest positive margins are among Republicans (+45 points) and younger Iowans (+34 points). The subgroups exhibiting the lowest net positive margins for charter school favorability include Democrats (+8 points), college graduates (+16 points), and those belonging to the Silent Generation (+16 points).

In addition:

 

School Type Enrollments and Satisfaction

 

The vast majority of parents’ experiences occur in public district schools, with more than nine out of 10 parents surveyed (92%) having children who attended at least one year of public school. Figure 9 displays parents’ schooling experiences by type based on survey responses.

 

Current and former school parents are much more likely to say they have been satisfied than dissatisfied across all types of schools. Nearly nine out of 10 parents who have sent their children to private school (88%) expressed they were satisfied, the highest levels of satisfaction among the four school types. The private school satisfaction margin (+76 points) is far greater than the satisfaction margin for homeschools (+58 points), charter schools (+54 points), and regular public schools (+51 points). Iowa parents were more likely to say they were “very satisfied” with private schools (52%) and homeschooling (44%) than public charter schools (30%) or public district schools (28%).

 

Grading Local Schools

 

Iowans are much more likely to give grades of “A” or “B” to private schools in their communities compared with their local public schools. When considering only those respondents with children in school, the local private schools (69% gave an “A” or “B”) fare better than regular public schools (62% gave an “A” or “B”) and public charter schools (50% gave an “A” or “B”). Only 7 percent of respondents give a “D” or “F” grade to private schools; 16 percent gave low grades to public charter schools; and 15 percent assign poor grades to area public district schools.

When considering all responses, we see approximately 55 percent of Iowans give an “A” or “B” to local private schools; 24 percent give an “A” or “B” to local public charter schools; and 51 percent giving those high grades to regular local public schools. Only 6 percent of respondents give a “D” or “F” grade to private schools; 14 percent give the same low grades to regular public schools; and 7 percent suggest low grades for public charter schools.

It is important to highlight that much higher proportions of respondents do not express any view (potentially due to the lack of such schools in various respondents’ communities) for private schools (25%) or public charter schools (53%), compared with the proportion that do not grade regular public schools (5%).

 

School Type Preferences

 

When asked for a preferred school type, nearly half of Iowa parents would choose a public district school (48%) as a first option for their child. Nearly two-fifths of respondents (36%) would select a private school. Nine percent would like to homeschool their child, and seven percent would choose a charter school.7

Private preferences signal a glaring disconnect with estimated school enrollment patterns in Iowa. About 89 percent of K–12 students attend public district schools across the state. Less than one percent of students currently go to public charter schools. About eight percent of students enroll in private or parochial schools, including about 2 percent doing so through the state’s tax-credit scholarship program. And it is estimated about 3 percent of the state’s students are homeschooled.8

In a split-sample experiment, interviewers asked a baseline question and an alternate version using a short phrase in addition to the baseline. When inserting the short phrase “… and financial costs and transportation were of no concern,” respondents are more likely to select private school compared to responses to the version without the phrase. The phrase’s effect appeared to increase the likelihood for parents choosing private schools (+11 point increase from baseline to alternate) or electing to homeschool (+2 point increase). The phrasing effect depressed the likelihood of parents to choose a public district school (-10 point decrease) or public charter school (-3 point decrease). The inserted language in the alternate version appears to be a clear signal that can increase the attraction toward private schools while decreasing the likelihood to choose a public district school. Overall, 43 percent of Iowans said that if financial cost and transportation were of no concern, they would select private schooling to obtain the best education for their child.

 

We asked survey respondents a follow-up question to find out the main reason they chose a certain type of school. Respondents choosing district schools were more likely to prioritize “diversity/variety” as a reason (26%) than those preferring other schooling sectors; district school choosers were also unique in listing “socialization/peers/other kids” (13%) as a reason. Private (12%), charter (20%), and homeschool (10%) choosers specified individualized attention as a reason they selected their child’s school; those selecting charter (19%) and homeschool (21%) also selected their schools for academic and curriculum reasons at similar levels. We encourage readers to cautiously interpret these results because sample sizes were relatively small for the respondents that chose charter schools.

 

Perceived Direction of K–12 Education

 

More than half of Iowans (52%) say they think K–12 education in the state is on the “wrong track,” compared to 39 percent thinking it is going in the “right direction.” On balance, the mood for K–12 education tends to be negative, showcased by a negative margin of -13 points. Those in Generation Z were the only observed demographic with a robust sample size to have a positive margin (+14 points). In addition, those in Gen Z (40%) were less likely to say “wrong track” than Gen Xers (58%).

 

Views on Spending in K–12 Education

 

On average, according to Private School Review, Iowa private schools charge approximately $5,279 for tuition per student. Respondents were equally likely to underestimate and overestimate private school tuition (50% each).  Responses ranged from $0 to $70,000. The average response was $8,427, while the median response was $5,000. Approximately one-sixth of respondents (17%) provided an estimate of $10,000 or more, while half (50%) provided an estimate of $5,000 or less.9

 

On average, Iowa spends $11,724 on each student in the state’s public schools, based on a spending statistic termed “current expenditures.”10 Respondents were much more likely to underestimate public per-pupil spending (89%) than overestimate it (11%).  Responses ranged from $1,000 to $60,000. The average response was $6,287, while the median response was $5,000. Only three percent of respondents provided an estimate of $10,000 or more, while nearly one-third of respondents (32%) provided an estimate of $2,000 or less.

If instead of “total expenditures” we use “current expenditures” per student ($13,611 in 2017–18)—a more expansive federal government definition for K–12 education spending that includes capital costs and debt repayment—the proportion of Iowans likely to underestimate per-pupil spending increases three percentage points (92%).11

 

Given an actual per-student spending statistic, Iowans are much less likely to say public school funding is at a level that is “too low.” In a split-sample experiment, we asked two slightly different questions. On the baseline version, 51 percent of respondents said public school funding was “too low.” However, on the version where we included a statistic for average public per-pupil spending in Iowa ($11,724 in 2017–18; the most recent statistic available when the survey was fielded), the proportion that said spending was “too low” shrank by 15 percentage points to 36 percent.12

 

Impact of COVID-19

 

While much about the way K–12 education was delivered in Iowa and across the country was altered by the COVID-19 pandemic and related school closures beginning in March 2020, school sector enrollment patterns in Iowa did not appear to be dramatically altered as of December 2020. That being said, we did observe some movement between school sectors when comparing pre- and post-pandemic.

In February 2020, 81 percent of students attended public district schools based on responses of Iowa parents. That amount decreased by five percentage points (76%) for the school year beginning 2020–21. Where Iowa’s largest school sector saw a modest enrollment decrease, one of its smallest saw a comparatively significant increase in students. Prior to the pandemic, about six percent of Iowa students were homeschooled; that amount increased to 11 percent by the 2020–21 school year.

 

Current Iowa school parents reported that nearly half of their students (45%) are taking classes completely in person and more than four out of five students are taking at least some of their classes in person, when factoring in those whose education is a mix of in-person and online. Slightly more than one out of 10 Iowa students are being educated completely online this school year, according to parent responses.

 

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, more current school parents in Iowa find homeschooling more favorable (29%) than less favorable (23%). Slightly less than half (47%) of current school parents said their perspectives on homeschooling were about the same as they were before the pandemic. Suburbanites were the demographic most likely to find homeschooling more favorable after the pandemic rather than less favorable (+14 points), followed by Republicans (+12 points), females (+8 points), and Millennials (+7 points).  The demographic most likely to see homeschooling less favorably after the pandemic are Democrats (-2 points).

 

Nearly two out of five (39%) current school parents in Iowa say they are at least somewhat likely to homeschool their children either full- or part-time during the 2020-21 school year. Suburbanites were more likely to indicate a likelihood of homeschooling (50%), followed by Millennials (47%), females (47%), and Democrats (46%). The demographics least likely to indicate they were likely to homeschool this school year were those in Generation X (23%), males (32%), Republicans (35%), and parents from small towns or rural areas (37%).

 

Appendix 1 - Survey Project and Profile

Title: Iowa K–12 & School Choice Survey

Survey Funder: EdChoice

Survey Data Collection and Quality Control: Braun Research, Inc. (BRI)

Interview Dates: December 14–29, 2020

Sample Frames: Iowa Registered Voters (age 18+)

Sampling Method: Online: Non-probability-based Opt-in Panel; Phone: Dual Frame, Probability-based, Random Digit Dial (RDD)

Language(s): English

Interview Method: Mixed Mode

Online, N = 500

Live Telephone, N = 500

Interview Length: Online: 10.2 minutes (average); Phone: 15.3 minutes (average)

Sample Size and Margin of Error: Total (N = 1,000): ±3.1 percentage points

Response Rate: Online: 18.6%; Landline: 2.6%; Cell: 4.2%

Weighting?: Yes—Age, County, Gender, Ethnicity, Race, Income, Party ID

Oversampling? No

Project Contact: Drew Catt, dcatt@edchoice.org

The authors are responsible for overall survey design; question wording and ordering; this report’s analysis, charts, and writing; and any unintentional errors or misrepresentations.

 

EdChoice is the survey’s sponsor and sole funder at the time of publication.

Appendix 2

Appendix 3

Appendix 4

Appendix 5

Appendix 6

Appendix 7

About the Authors

Andrew D. Catt

Andrew D. Catt is the director of state research and special projects for EdChoice. In that role, Drew conducts analyses on private educational choice programs, conducts surveys of private school leaders and parents of school-aged children, and conducts geospatial analyses. Drew graduated from Vanderbilt University in 2008 with a bachelor’s degree in Human and Organizational Development, specializing in Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness. During that time, he researched the effects of homeschooling on socialization. Drew received his Master of Public Affairs in Nonprofit Management at Indiana University’s School of Public and Environmental Affairs in Indianapolis. He also received his Master of Arts in Philanthropic Studies through the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. While in graduate school, Drew’s research focused on teacher performance incentives and cross-sector collaboration. Drew recently received a Graduate Certificate in Geographic Information Science (GIS) from IUPUI. Drew is a native of central Indiana and currently resides in downtown Indianapolis with his wife Elizabeth and their son Theodore.

Michael Shaw

Michael Shaw is a senior research analyst for EdChoice. In that role, Mike analyzes and writes about school choice data and policy issues based on empirical research. Before joining EdChoice, Mike worked as a reporter for news organizations in Colorado, Virginia, and Missouri. He holds degrees in Economics and Journalism as well as a minor in Spanish from the University of Missouri. While there, Mike researched parochial school consolidation in the St. Louis area, of which he is a native.

John Kristof

John Kristof is a research analyst for EdChoice. In that role, John supports quality control as the organization’s data collector, verifies its research, and analyzes data and policy issues. Before joining EdChoice, John worked two fiscal research internships at the Indiana General Assembly, where he studied education finance and funding formulas, tax expenditures, economic development, and other fiscal issues. Before his stint in state government, John was a research fellow at the Sagamore Institute in Indianapolis and an economics writer at the Illinois Policy Institute in Chicago. John is completing his Master of Public Affairs in Policy Analysis at Indiana University’s Paul H. O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs in Indianapolis. He received a Bachelor of Science in economics from Indiana Wesleyan University and is a proud alumnus of the John Wesley Honors College.

Trish Wilger

Trish Wilger is the executive director of the Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education and Iowa Advocates for Choice in Education. In that role, Trish guides the Iowa school choice coalition, cultivates grassroots support, and works in public policy and legislative efforts. Trish is a graduate of Grinnell College and Marquette University Law School. Before coming to Iowa ACE, Trish practiced law for 15 years. Through her juvenile court work she saw firsthand the powerful impact of a solid, student-centered education on a child’s life. Trish now works to give all parents access to that best-fit education.

Acknowledgments

We are extremely grateful to the Iowans that took the time to respond to the survey online or via phone. We are also grateful to Braun Research, Inc. for administering our survey and for data collection and quality control. We deeply appreciate the work of Michael Davey for making these pages look more professional and Jen Wagner for correcting spelling and grammar mistakes.

 

Any remaining errors in this publication are solely those of the authors.

Additional Resources

Iowa-Questionnaire-and-Topline-Results

Iowa-Poll-Methods-and-Data-Sources

Iowa-Screener-Questions

Endnotes
  1. Stephen Q. Cornman, Lei Zhou, Malia Howell, Jeremy Phillips, and Jumaane Young (2020), Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: FY 18 (NCES 2020-306), retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020306.pdf
  2. Authors’ calculations; EdChoice (2021), The ABCs of School Choice: The Comprehensive Guide to Every Private School Choice Program in America, 2021 edition, retrieved from https://www.edchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021-ABCs-of-School-Choice-WEB.pdf
  3. Ibid.
  4. For demographic and subgroup terminology: We use the label “current school parents” to refer to those respondents who said they have one or more children in preschool through high school. We use the label “former school parents” for respondents who said their children are past high school age. We use the label “non-parents” for respondents without children. For terms regarding age groups: “younger” reflect respondents who are age 18 to 34; “middle-age” are 35 to 54; and “seniors” are 55 and older. Labels pertaining to income groups go as follows: “low-income earners” < $40,000; “middle-income earners” ≥$40,000 and < $80,000; “high-income earners” ≥ $80,000. We adapt the Pew Research Center’s classifications of generational cohorts for this report: Generation Z (1997 or earlier) Millennial (1981–1996); Generation X (1965–1980); Baby Boomer (1946–1964); and Silent Generation (1928–1945). Pew Research Center, Generations and Age [Web page], accessed January 20, 2021, retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/topics/generations-and-age
  5. EdChoice (2021), What Is An Education Savings Account? [Web page], January 19, 2021, retrieved from https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/types-of-school-choice/education-savings-account
  6. Iowa Department of Education (2021), Charter Schools [Web page], accessed January 25, 2021, retrieved from: https://educateiowa.gov/pk-12/options-educational-choice/charter-schools; Education Commission of the States (2020), Charter Schools: State Profile – Iowa [Web page], accessed January 25, 2021, retrieved from: http://ecs.force.com/mbdata/mbstprofile?Rep=CSP20&st=Iowa
  7. Unless otherwise noted, the results in this section reflect the composite average of split-sample responses of current and former school parents to both splits for question 15.
  8. Authors’ calculations; Michael Shaw and Andrew D. Catt (2021, January 26), 2021 EdChoice Share: Which Learning Settings Are Families Choosing in the States [Blog post], retrieved from EdChoice website: https://www.edchoice.org/engage/2021-edchoice-share-which-types-of-schools-and-learning-settings-are-families-choosing-in-the-states/
  9. Private School Review, Iowa Private Schools by Tuition Cost [Web page], accessed January 21, 2021, retrieved from: https://www.privateschoolreview.com/tuition-stats/iowa
  10. Stephen Q. Cornman, Lei Zhou, Malia Howell, Jeremy Phillips, and Jumaane Young (2020), Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: FY 18 (NCES 2020-306), retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020306.pdf
  11. Ibid.; “Current Expenditures” data include dollars spent on instruction, instruction-related support services, and other elementary/secondary current expenditures. “Total Expenditures” includes those categories and also expenditures on capital outlay, other programs, and interest on long-term debt.
  12. Stephen Q. Cornman, Lei Zhou, Malia Howell, Jeremy Phillips, and Jumaane Young (2020), Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: FY 18 (NCES 2020-306), retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020306.pdf
" <=========