programs. Such funding has been critized by some authorities for waste, uncoordinated programs, excessive accounting and poor planning.

Of all the appropriations made for supporting education in Illinois, the Common School Fund contains over 80 per cent of the dollars available. It includes funding for equalization aid (also known as general state aid or distribution fund), teachers' retirement, salaries and expenses of superintendents of educational service regions (county superintendents), orphanage tuition and State-owned housing tuition.

The following table demonstrates the substantial growth in Illinois of State appropriations to the Common School Fund.

Table I
Growth of the Common School Fund

Common Year 1973 1963 1953 1943 1933 1923

School Fund appropriations $927,108,000 196,698,000 62,219,000 15,690,000 10,557,000 8,057,000

Percentage of total appropriations 12.0 107 8.7 7.8 8.7 12.0

(Note: Amounts shown for years prior to 1973 are equal to one-half the biennial appropriation.)

The table gives a fair indication of the rising costs of educational services in Illinois and dispels any notion that the Common School Fund commands a disproportionate share of total revenues.

As the volume of State funds flowing to public schools grew, the primary criteria of adequacy and equity remained undefined.

Disparity in taxable wealth
State intervention in the public school finance system is imperative to achieve some degree of equity — particularly when there is such wide disparity in taxable wealth. Assessed valuation per pupil in the State ranged from $470,622 to $3,180 in 1972. Since local revenue is determined by multiplying the school's tax rate by assessed valuation, there are definite limits to what poorer districts can raise. The application of the equalization aid concept means that the State guarantees a certain amount of revenue per child. When local minimum tax rates are applied to the assessed valuation and the product is less than the amount guaranteed, the State makes up the difference.

'State intervention in the public school finance system is imperative to achieve some degree of equity. Assessed valuation per pupil in the State ranged from $470,622 to $3,180'

The minimum tax rates and the guaranteed amount are set by statute. Obviously, if the guaranteed amount were increased, more State money would go to all schools that qualify; if the minimum tax rates required by statute were raised, fewer districts would qualify for State aid and all would receive less. Both of these variables — the local tax rate and the total guaranteed amount — have been increased through the years. Minimum tax rates qualifying for equalization aid are currently pegged at 1.08 per cent for unit districts (kindergarten through 12th grade) and .84 per cent for both elementary districts and high school districts. For very small dual districts (areas where a separate elementary district and a high school district are located), the qualifying rates are .90 per cent for each or 1.80 per cent total. All of these rates are for the educational fund only, and all State aid paid to the district under the equalization formula goes directly to this fund. The different qualifying rates are reportedly designed to encourage school district consolidation, but the fact is that dual districts are penalized under this arrangement.

Since most districts use a tax rate higher than the minimum qualifying rates for the educational fund and have other tax rates to provide money for other funds, this computation guarantees equality of funding only to the point of the guaranteed amount. The guaranteed amount per student in average daily attendance (ADA) is $520 when used in this computation. Because high school students are more costly to educate, they are weighted by the value of 1.25. When this value is added, ADA becomes weighted average daily attendance (WADA).

Another feature of this equalization program was designed to help certain metropolitan districts cope with the numerous and costly demands imposed by high concentrations of impoverished school children. This feature provided a density bonus to school districts will over 10,000 WADA on a graduated scale — the more the enrollment exceeded 10,000, the greater the bonus The school finance bill reported out of the 1973 legislative session altered this provision and related it directly to the incidence of low-income students. Students from families with annual incomes of $3,000 or less (and other students designated by Title I of the Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965) are weighted by .45 no matter how small the school system. This weighting factor added to the WADA pupil base determines total weighted average daily attendance (TWADA). These aggregate weightings then become the units on which the guarantee is based.

ADA, WADA and TWADA
However, these aggregate weightings still did not provide enough State aid, so another feature was added. This feature, a percentage "add-on," was the most politically feasible. The "add-on" is a percentage of the State grant, which awards more funds in proportion to the State aid already received by a district. Through time this percentage has been increased to the present 25 percent.

For wealthier districts that do not receive as much as $ 120 per student, an alternative computation can be made. (The assessed valuation per WADA is divided into the assessed valuation per WADA needed to raise $120 with the required tax rates. That figure is multiplied by $ 120, the product of which is then multiplied by the WADA of the district.

If that alternative provides less than $48 per WADA, the district is still eligible for $48 per student, which becomes a flat grant. Such flat grants and alternative computations are increased by the percentage "add-on" described

48 /Illinois Issues/February 1975