School District Funding Models

Raising capital is one challenge. Investing billions for impact across fragmented mandates, balance sheets, and governance systems is harder. Last week, at the Board of International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd), we reviewed what it actually takes to invest capital at that scale across Asia and Africa. At first glance, this could look like a familiar capital allocation exercise. But it is not. This is not philanthropic grantmaking, official development aid, multilateral financing as we know it, or traditional public funding. It is all of them, combined into a single facility. But these forms of capital do not naturally converge. Each actor brings its own mandate, risk tolerance, and governance framework. What works within one balance sheet does not automatically translate to another. Alignment is not a given. It has to be engineered. This is exactly where the opportunity sits. It is precisely because these forms of capital and mandates are different that something new becomes possible: The ability to drive evidence-based education reforms at scale, with capital behind them and accountability around them. Public systems anchor policy and long-term implementation. Multilateral development banks deploy capital at scale. Philanthropy takes risk, supports innovation, and maintains a strong focus on evidence and outcomes. Sovereign donors, even as ODA comes under pressure, can maintain momentum by providing guarantees that unlock significantly larger flows of capital. What we are testing at IFFEd is not just new instruments, but a new level of coordination across institutions that were never designed to operate together. Reaching that ambition will require more partners at the table, including sovereigns and philanthropies willing to deploy capital in an aligned way. And the implication extends across the system, where there is real momentum. IFFEd, the Global Partnership for Education and Education Cannot Wait (ECW) are aiming to mobilize close to USD 10 billion for education by 2030. We are getting better at raising capital. We are not yet as good at aligning it. If these efforts remain parallel, we will continue to leave impact on the table. The future of development finance will be defined by our ability to align different forms of capital at scale, across institutions and geographies. Now is the moment to make that alignment real.

Property taxes quietly shape real estate returns more than most investors realize. A new 2024 map of median property taxes across the U.S. highlights a massive spread: from ~$900 in West Virginia and Alabama to over $9,000 in New Jersey. That’s a 10x difference in annual holding cost for similar assets. A few observations worth thinking about: ✅The Northeast dominates the high end → strong public services, but heavier carry costs ✅Lower-tax states in the South/Midwest → often more cash flow-friendly ✅High-price states (like CA, WA) still generate large tax bills even with moderate rates ✅Property taxes aren’t static; they directly impact long-term yield and exit assumptions For investors, this isn’t just a line item; it’s a strategy. In markets with high property taxes: → Rent growth needs to keep pace → Expense ratios are structurally higher → Underwriting mistakes get amplified over time In lower-tax markets: → Cash flow looks better on paper → But often comes with different demand drivers and risks At the end of the day, property taxes are one of the most predictable, but often overlooked, forces in real estate performance. If you’re underwriting deals across multiple states, this is one variable you can’t afford to ignore. Source: U.S. Census Bureau (ACS 2024 1-Year Estimates, Niccolo Conte, Christina Kostandi), Visual Capitalist #RealEstate #RealEstateInvesting #Multifamily #PropTech #CRE #Investing #HousingMarket #DataDriven #MarketResearch

Today’s Institute For Fiscal Studies Annual Report on Education Spending (https://lnkd.in/e3SnMcDZ) again highlights the significant real-terms cuts to maintenance support for students over recent years remain unaddressed. By 2025–26, the poorest students will have access to £1,125 less in real terms than they did in 2020 to cover living costs. This is a stark reminder of the growing financial pressures on those who already face the most significant barriers to higher education. The government’s silence on the long-term future of maintenance support, including whether grants will be reintroduced, adds further uncertainty. These reductions are not just numbers on a page-they represent students skipping meals, struggling to pay rent, and sacrificing their mental health and academic success due to financial strain. At The Sutton Trust, we’ve consistently called for the reintroduction of means-tested maintenance grants to ensure that financial barriers do not hold back talented young people from achieving their potential. You can read more about our recommendations in our Fair Opportunity for All manifesto: https://lnkd.in/e_YjmG89 The choice is clear: invest in students now or risk deepening inequalities that undermine both social mobility and the wider economy. #SocialMobility #HigherEducation #StudentFinance #EducationFunding #SuttonTrust #FairOpportunityForAll #IFS #PolicyChange

Reclaiming Pakistan’s Education: A Call to Action Each year, billions of rupees flow out of Pakistan to foreign educational boards like Cambridge, which collects nearly Rs 50 billion annually from O-Level and A-Level exams alone. This staggering amount is more than eight times the Federal Government’s annual budget for higher education. While these systems cater to a privileged elite, our local universities and public education system remain grossly underfunded. The consequences are dire: • Economic Drain: Resources that could uplift local education are funneled abroad. • Educational Inequality: Only the wealthiest can afford quality education, widening social divides. • Brain Drain: Bright minds leave Pakistan, taking their potential with them. • Cultural Erosion: Foreign curricula overshadow our unique cultural identity. But we can change this. Pakistan needs bold, transformative reforms to reclaim its education system: 1️⃣ Invest in Local Education: Increase funding for public schools and universities while building a credible national examination system. 2️⃣ Promote Equity: Provide subsidies and scholarships to make quality education accessible for all. 3️⃣ Retain Talent: Offer competitive opportunities for students and professionals to stay and thrive in Pakistan. 4️⃣ Strengthen Local Institutions: Partner with private sectors to enhance infrastructure, research, and global competitiveness. 5️⃣ Reclaim Cultural Identity: Create curricula that celebrate Pakistan’s heritage while preparing students for a globalized world. The stakes are high. Pakistan’s future depends on a robust, equitable, and self-reliant education system. Let’s make it happen—together. #EducationReform #Pakistan #InvestInLocal #EquityInEducation #FutureOfPakistan

🌍 #InternationalWomensDay has passed, but the work for gender equity in education must accelerate. This year’s #AccelerateAction theme reminds us: progress for women and girls can’t wait. We need bold action, not incremental change—especially in education finance, where gender equity must be embedded into the systems shaping outcomes. 📢 One growing approach—Outcomes-Based Financing (OBF)—has transformed education by tying funding to results rather than inputs. But here’s the challenge: ➡️ When success is measured in overall outcomes, who is being left behind? This is the powerful question Sonali Saini raised in her recent India Development Review (IDR) article. When incentives prioritize efficiency and effectiveness over equity, OBF risks benefiting those who are easiest to support—while girls and other marginalized students remain overlooked. At Dalberg, we’ve worked on some of the most exciting OBF models in India, including: 📌 Educate Girls DIB 📌 Quality Education India (QEI) DIB 📌 Skill India Impact Bond 📌 #LiftEd These initiatives have driven measurable impact, but they also highlight a key lesson: without deliberate design, OBF can unintentionally reinforce inequities rather than reduce them. 💡 So how do we accelerate action for gender-responsive OBF? Here are four ways to ensure OBF actively drives gender equity: ✅ 𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗱 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗽𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗹𝘆 – The Skill India Impact Bond ensured at least 60% of beneficiaries were women, embedding gender inclusion from the start. 💰 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗮𝘆𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 – The Educate Girls DIB dedicated 20% of payments to enrolling out-of-school girls, ensuring incentives rewarded inclusion. 📊 𝗠𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 – By tracking sex-disaggregated data, QEI DIB partners could see how girls and boys were performing differently, allowing for mid-course corrections to support the most vulnerable. 🔗 𝗥𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 – A girl’s challenges don’t exist in isolation. OBF can incentivize impact at the intersections of gender, disability, caste, and socio-economic status. If we are serious about accelerating gender equality, funders and investors must prioritize equity—not just effectiveness and efficiency—when engaging with OBF models. Let’s not wait until next IWD to push for gender-equitable education finance. 📖 Read Sonali’s full article here: https://lnkd.in/dtSGDFja Safeena Husain, Gagandeep Singh Nanda, Shruti Goyal, Vismit Bansal, Ruvneet Kang, Swetha Totapally, Charlie Habershon, Sai Rama, Abha Thorat-Shah, Anushree Parekh, Prachi Jain Windlass, Samar Bajaj, Abhinav Bhatia, Dhun Davar, Sietse Wouters, Vandana Bahri, Dhir Jhingran, Kruti Bharucha, Izzy Boggild-Jones

Every year, the GOI education budget sees a percentage increase, and headlines celebrate it as a victory. But... 📉 India’s education spending is still far below the NEP 2020 recommendation of 6% of GDP. This year’s allocation is just 0.36% of GDP at the national level—hardly the systemic investment we need. ✍ Most of the increased funding is absorbed by routine costs, not transformative reforms. Yes, Samagra Shiksha saw an 11% rise, and PM POSHAN grew by 25%, but where’s the long-term vision for teacher training, school infrastructure, or learning embedded within the budget? ⏳ Delayed fund releases continue to choke impact. States struggle to access central funds due to procedural bottlenecks, with implementation often lagging behind budget announcements. The Samagra Shiksha scheme saw high utilisation rates post-pandemic, but delays in fund release slowed impact. Similarly, only 51% of PM POSHAN’s allocation for FY 24-25 had been released as of February 2025. Incremental budget increases will not solve the crisis when structural issues persist. For effective education reform, we need to move beyond percentage hikes and focus on spending efficiency, investment on teachers, and outcome - driven policies. More money isn’t the solution - smarter, timely, and need-based investment is. How might we shift the focus from just budget allocation numbers to a deeper impact on what these allocations will truly impact the today and tomorrow of our country's education system? #EducationReform #Budget2025 #FundTheFuture Note: Data from the FRG Insights and GOI Budget 2025

Sierra Leone’s Minister of Basic and Senior Education, Hon. Conrad Sackey, in a compelling new op-ed, reveals how his government transformed one of the world’s most challenging education landscapes into a continental success story. His insights demonstrate why Sierra Leone’s lessons could fundamentally reshape Africa’s economic trajectory and offer a practical blueprint for other nations facing similar challenges. Key takeaways: As African leaders gather for budget planning cycles, Minister Conrad Sackey’s piece arrives at a time when education financing faces its greatest crisis. UNESCO’s latest data shows the continent needs an additional $97 billion to meet 2030 education targets, while donor funding continues its steep decline. Many African governments now spend more on servicing debt than educating children. It is important to prioritise foundational learning! Sierra Leone’s remarkable turnaround offers hope amid Africa’s learning crisis. The country now allocates 20–22% of its national budget to education—among the highest globally—and achieved 92% budget execution in 2023. This stands in stark contrast to regional averages, where education budgets often fail to reach classrooms. With 89% of ten-year-olds in Sub-Saharan Africa unable to read a simple sentence, the minister frames this as an economic emergency, not merely an education challenge. His analysis reveals that foundational learning deficits will cost Africa trillions in lost productivity as 40% of the world’s youth become African by 2050. Minister Conrad Sackey also unveils concrete solutions, including Sierra Leone’s pioneering 1% surcharge on withholding taxes dedicated exclusively to education, a replicable model that generates predictable domestic financing when external support proves unreliable. Link to the article: https://lnkd.in/dR6JwQRU #FoundationalLearning #EducationFinance #AfricaEducation #LearningCrisis #SierraLeone #EducationReform

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." —Ronald Coase Since October, Measure ULA advocates have been sharing data showing a 60% increase in permitted units in Q3 2025 compared to Q3 2024 (1st image). It's intended as evidence that the tax's impact on production, documented in our Taxing Tomorrow report, is transitory. Their use of the data is misleading. Why? Because up to that date, Q3 2024 was the worst quarter for housing construction permits since before 2020. My chart (2nd image) illustrates this: the area circled in red is their baseline. If you arbitrarily choose the worst quarter of production in 4+ years (probably 8+ years) as your baseline, you're likely to show improvement in later quarters. That does nothing to exculpate Measure ULA for its negative impact on multifamily production. That's point number one. The group also says permits rose quarter-over-quarter through 2025. Again, true but misleading. The 3rd chart shows quarterly permitting through Q3 2025, with Q1 2025 circled. This is their baseline for this claim — the worst quarter in 5 years. That's point two. The folks sharing this rosy interpretation want us to believe that the market is recovering, but there's just not much data to support that conclusion yet. If we look at annual figures (4th image), which smooth out some of the quarterly variability, 2025 looks about as bad as 2024, which itself was historically bad. Sales also haven't shown much sign of recovering. Mike Manville and Mott Smith evaluated ULA's impact on sales over $5 million and on property tax revenue. Their study period ended with Q4 2024, but newer data shows the gap between LA and the rest of the county has actually widened since then (5th image). In my report with Jason Ward, we looked at transactions of properties with high-density zoning and low-intensity uses as a leading indicator of redevelopment, also finding a 50% drop in LA sales relative to other LA County jurisdictions. As above, that trend has persisted over the past 6 months (6th image). Maybe things will get better in the future. Maybe other data tells a more positive story without misleading its audience. But the data presented by ULA advocates shouldn't persuade anyone that the market's already recovering.

One thing that doesn’t get enough attention in the Texas housing affordability debate: property taxes. The legislature has made progress, capping annual appraisal growth and expanding the homestead exemption, but the system still largely favors those who understand how to work it. And make no mistake, it is a system with rules. Those rules are just not applied evenly. Those who know when to use the income, equity, or comparison approach, how ag exemptions and rollback taxes work, and how to negotiate with appraisal districts, they have an advantage. If you have leverage or scale you have an advantage. That knowledge gap matters. Texas homeowners pay some of the highest effective property tax rates in the nation, around 1.6% of home value on average, and property taxes account for nearly half of all local government revenue. It is a huge part of the cost of homeownership in the state of Texas. Yet, the average homeowner has zero leverage. Large landowners benefit through ag exemptions. Commercial owners use valuation discounts. Estate properties often win through equitable arguments. Meanwhile, the ordinary homeowner’s value closely follows the market, year after year, with few tools to push back. Having spent hours in appraisal district offices and ARB hearings, I’ve seen how subjective the process can be, and how often well-meaning homeowners are told not to worry because their value is “capped this year,” without realizing that today’s inflated value becomes tomorrow’s baseline. This drives up all values. Knowledge shouldn’t be the barrier to fairness. If we’re serious about housing affordability in Texas, we have to talk about property taxes, not just rates, but rules.

Governor DeSantis wants to replace property taxes on homesteads with consumption taxes. Using 2023 ACS data, we find that the average renter in Florida earns about $65,000, while the average homeowner earns about $112,000, meaning the policy change would redistribute after-tax income regressively. Moreover, we are likely understating the redistributive impact. Reducing property taxes on homeowners will almost certainly lead to their property values rising, while renters (because landlords will not see their taxes fall) will get no benefit in the property market. Beyond all of this, owners receive hidden income in the form of imputed rent that renters do not. And, of course, lower-income people spend a larger share of their income, meaning that consumption taxes fall disproportionately on them.