Places › Counties
Richland County
9 districts · 14,258 pupils · 5 on the guarantee · 2 at the 20-mill floor · richest 2.4× the poorest
All 88 counties, ordered by that ratio. The median Ohio district receives $5,910 per pupil in state aid in FY2027.
The spread inside Richland County
Lucas Local stands on 2.4× Mansfield City's tax base per pupil: $429,354 against $179,247. Every district in the county by the assessed valuation each of its pupils stands on — one dot each, poorest on the left. The shaded box is the middle half of them.
The values
- Mansfield City: $179,247 per pupil, $9,573 state aid per pupil
- Plymouth-Shiloh Local: $191,539 per pupil, $10,681 state aid per pupil
- Madison Local: $199,450 per pupil, $7,275 state aid per pupil
- Shelby City: $227,355 per pupil, $5,572 state aid per pupil
- Ontario Local: $229,031 per pupil, $4,055 state aid per pupil
- Clear Fork Valley Local: $235,672 per pupil, $5,530 state aid per pupil
- Lexington Local: $252,792 per pupil, $3,684 state aid per pupil
- Crestview Local: $369,167 per pupil, $7,920 state aid per pupil
- Lucas Local: $429,354 per pupil, $6,975 state aid per pupil
| District | Valuation per pupil | State aid per pupil | Pupils |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lucas Local The most property wealth per pupil here |
$429,354 | $6,975 | 391 |
| Mansfield City The least |
$179,247 | $9,573 | 2,794 |
These four figures are the headline; the full comparison puts the two side by side on every measure the panel carries.
Where that sits among the 84 counties with more than one district reporting a tax base — one dot each, narrowest on the left, and the rule marked Richland is this county. The median is 2.1× apart.
The values
- Adams: 1.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Carroll: 1.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Auglaize: 1.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Harrison: 1.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Morrow: 1.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Jackson: 1.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Meigs: 1.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Van Wert: 1.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Preble: 1.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Paulding: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Greene: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Champaign: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Huron: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Highland: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Mercer: 1.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Pike: 1.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Geauga: 1.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Madison: 1.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Putnam: 1.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Medina: 1.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Gallia: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Holmes: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Clinton: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Pickaway: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Union: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Henry: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Sandusky: 1.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Darke: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Williams: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Shelby: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Guernsey: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Perry: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Ashtabula: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Warren: 1.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Delaware: 1.9× between its richest and poorest district
- Fayette: 1.9× between its richest and poorest district
- Fulton: 2.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Scioto: 2.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Washington: 2.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Clermont: 2.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Hardin: 2.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Wood: 2.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Muskingum: 2.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Brown: 2.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Erie: 2.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Tuscarawas: 2.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Hancock: 2.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Coshocton: 2.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Clark: 2.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Wyandot: 2.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Richland: 2.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Ashland: 2.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Miami: 2.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Lawrence: 2.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Logan: 2.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Belmont: 2.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Knox: 2.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Lucas: 2.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Portage: 2.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Ross: 2.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Licking: 2.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Marion: 2.6× between its richest and poorest district
- Seneca: 2.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Wayne: 2.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Noble: 2.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Fairfield: 2.9× between its richest and poorest district
- Allen: 3.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Butler: 3.0× between its richest and poorest district
- Stark: 3.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Defiance: 3.2× between its richest and poorest district
- Summit: 3.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Columbiana: 3.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Athens: 3.8× between its richest and poorest district
- Franklin: 3.9× between its richest and poorest district
- Mahoning: 4.4× between its richest and poorest district
- Lorain: 4.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Lake: 4.7× between its richest and poorest district
- Crawford: 4.9× between its richest and poorest district
- Trumbull: 5.1× between its richest and poorest district
- Montgomery: 5.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Hamilton: 5.3× between its richest and poorest district
- Cuyahoga: 5.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Jefferson: 6.5× between its richest and poorest district
- Ottawa: 7.4× between its richest and poorest district
Two districts in the same county, 2.4 times apart on the tax base each pupil stands on — $250,107 per pupil of assessed valuation. Every mill Mansfield City levies raises 0.42 of what the same mill raises in Lucas Local, which is the disparity DeRolph was brought over and the reason the formula has an equalization term at all.
The formula answers it here: Mansfield City receives $2,598 more state aid per pupil than Lucas Local. Whether that closes the gap is a different question from whether it points the right way — $250,107 of valuation per pupil is not repaired by $2,598 of aid. Statewide, 294 districts are held above their formula amount.
9 districts
| District | Pupils | Valuation per pupil, FY2024 | State aid per pupil | Spending per pupil, FY2024 | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clear Fork Valley Local | 1,441 | $235,672 | $5,530 | $13,966 | on the guarantee · at the 20-mill floor |
| Crestview Local | 821 | $369,167 | $7,920 | $17,392 | on the guarantee · at the 20-mill floor |
| Lexington Local | 2,176 | $252,792 | $3,684 | $13,158 | on the guarantee |
| Lucas Local | 391 | $429,354 | $6,975 | $18,300 | on the guarantee |
| Madison Local | 2,446 | $199,450 | $7,275 | $16,164 | on formula |
| Mansfield City | 2,794 | $179,247 | $9,573 | $23,557 | on formula |
| Ontario Local | 1,882 | $229,031 | $4,055 | $11,611 | on formula |
| Plymouth-Shiloh Local | 605 | $191,539 | $10,681 | $18,260 | on formula |
| Shelby City | 1,703 | $227,355 | $5,572 | $14,647 | on the guarantee |
14,258 pupils across the districts listed, and that is a sum of these districts rather than a count of the county's children — Ohio school district boundaries cross county lines, so some of these pupils live elsewhere and some of the county's live in districts on another page. The department attributes each district to one county and this page inherits that attribution; it is a peer group, not a boundary.
Median state aid here is $6,975 per pupil, against $5,910 statewide. 5 of 9 are on the guarantee, against 48% of the state. 2 are at or below the 20-mill floor, where H.B. 920's reduction factors stop operating and a reappraisal raises revenue again.
Who gained, who lost
On total state support from FY2025 to FY2027, 6 of the 9 districts here rose and 3 fell. Every district here in the three years, on the measure selected. FY2025 is the department's final payment report; FY2026 and FY2027 are its models of those years, not payments. Changes are percentages of each district's own earlier year, so a city and a village read on one scale. Every figure is in nominal dollars.
On total state support:
- FY2025 to FY2026: of 9, 7 rose, 2 fell. The 2 that fell: Lexington Local and Mansfield City.
- FY2026 to FY2027: of 9, 6 rose, 3 fell. The 3 that fell: Madison Local, Mansfield City and Shelby City.
- FY2025 to FY2027: of 9, 6 rose, 3 fell. The 3 that fell: Lexington Local, Madison Local and Mansfield City.
The values
- Ontario Local: +9.7% (+$765,000) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Plymouth-Shiloh Local: +4.1% (+$273,038) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Lucas Local: +2.1% (+$62,589) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Clear Fork Valley Local: +1.7% (+$152,165) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Crestview Local: +0.8% (+$59,971) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Shelby City: +0.1% (+$14,661) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Madison Local: −1.4% (−$282,159) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Mansfield City: −2.2% (−$682,309) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
- Lexington Local: −3.8% (−$371,089) in total state support, FY2025 to FY2027
| Ontario Local | $7,871,820 | $8,177,458 | $8,636,820 | +3.9% +$305,639 | +5.6% +$459,361 | +9.7% +$765,000 |
40.4% | 37.3% | Foundation aid +$504,280 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plymouth-Shiloh Local | $6,697,239 | $6,875,688 | $6,970,277 | +2.7% +$178,448 | +1.4% +$94,589 | +4.1% +$273,038 |
59.1% | 54.6% | Foundation aid +$195,379 |
| Lucas Local | $3,029,976 | $3,073,405 | $3,092,566 | +1.4% +$43,429 | +0.6% +$19,160 | +2.1% +$62,589 |
29.6% | 23.1% | Transportation +$38,982 |
| Clear Fork Valley Local | $8,936,195 | $9,047,727 | $9,088,360 | +1.2% +$111,532 | +0.4% +$40,633 | +1.7% +$152,165 |
39.6% | 33.9% | Transportation +$66,675 |
| Crestview Local | $7,420,441 | $7,446,733 | $7,480,412 | +0.4% +$26,293 | +0.5% +$33,679 | +0.8% +$59,971 |
25.3% | 16.9% | Formula transition supplement −$87,152 |
| Shelby City | $11,019,091 | $11,061,759 | $11,033,751 | +0.4% +$42,668 | −0.3% −$28,008 | +0.1% +$14,661 |
49.0% | 44.5% | Foundation aid −$621,141 |
| Madison Local | $19,732,472 | $20,126,723 | $19,450,313 | +2.0% +$394,251 | −3.4% −$676,410 | −1.4% −$282,159 |
57.6% | 53.2% | Foundation aid −$513,658 |
| Mansfield City | $30,981,728 | $30,904,428 | $30,299,418 | −0.2% −$77,299 | −2.0% −$605,010 | −2.2% −$682,309 |
65.3% | 61.5% | Supplemental targeted assistance (repealed by H.B. 96) −$514,306 |
| Lexington Local | $9,837,087 | $9,316,123 | $9,465,998 | −5.3% −$520,964 | +1.6% +$149,875 | −3.8% −$371,089 |
30.2% | 24.6% | Foundation aid −$835,681 |
On foundation aid:
- FY2025 to FY2026: of 9, 4 rose, 2 fell, 3 did not move. The 2 that fell: Lexington Local and Shelby City.
- FY2026 to FY2027: of 9, 2 rose, 3 fell, 4 did not move. The 2 that rose: Ontario Local and Plymouth-Shiloh Local.
- FY2025 to FY2027: of 9, 2 rose, 4 fell, 3 did not move. The 2 that rose: Ontario Local and Plymouth-Shiloh Local.
The values
- Ontario Local: +7.1% (+$504,280) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Plymouth-Shiloh Local: +3.1% (+$195,379) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Clear Fork Valley Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Crestview Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Lucas Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Mansfield City: −1.3% (−$352,241) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Madison Local: −2.8% (−$513,658) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Shelby City: −6.1% (−$621,141) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
- Lexington Local: −9.4% (−$835,681) in foundation aid, FY2025 to FY2027
| Ontario Local | $7,126,335 | $7,234,084 | $7,630,616 | +1.5% +$107,749 | +5.5% +$396,532 | +7.1% +$504,280 |
40.4% | 37.3% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plymouth-Shiloh Local | $6,263,665 | $6,383,316 | $6,459,044 | +1.9% +$119,651 | +1.2% +$75,728 | +3.1% +$195,379 |
59.1% | 54.6% |
| Clear Fork Valley Local | $7,967,246 | $7,967,246 | $7,967,246 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 |
39.6% | 33.9% |
| Crestview Local | $6,503,681 | $6,503,681 | $6,503,681 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 |
25.3% | 16.9% |
| Lucas Local | $2,724,793 | $2,724,793 | $2,724,793 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 | 0.0% $0 |
29.6% | 23.1% |
| Mansfield City | $27,095,105 | $27,251,761 | $26,742,864 | +0.6% +$156,656 | −1.9% −$508,898 | −1.3% −$352,241 |
65.3% | 61.5% |
| Madison Local | $18,309,138 | $18,488,767 | $17,795,480 | +1.0% +$179,629 | −3.7% −$693,287 | −2.8% −$513,658 |
57.6% | 53.2% |
| Shelby City | $10,113,306 | $9,995,951 | $9,492,165 | −1.2% −$117,355 | −5.0% −$503,787 | −6.1% −$621,141 |
49.0% | 44.5% |
| Lexington Local | $8,850,583 | $8,014,902 | $8,014,902 | −9.4% −$835,681 | 0.0% $0 | −9.4% −$835,681 |
30.2% | 24.6% |
The two measures can disagree in sign. Total state support is every line the department pays a district through; foundation aid is core foundation funding and the guarantee alone, and a district held at its base does not move on it whatever its other lines do. Each district's name opens its change tab, which splits its own figures by line.
Without supplemental targeted assistance, which H.B. 96 repealed after FY2025, total state support from FY2025 to FY2026 moved: Mansfield City +1.4% ($514,306 of it in FY2025). That district's first step on total state support carries the whole supplement as a loss; this is what the rest of the payment did.
State share, from FY2026 to FY2027, falls in every district here. It is the part of base cost the state pays after a district's local capacity is charged, so it reaches the dollars through foundation aid; the FY2025 payment report does not publish it.
The same steps for every district in Ohio, one provision at a time — the supplement H.B. 96 repealed, the new count in DPIA, reappraisal through local capacity and the phase-in — are on What changed.
A district whose territory crosses a county line is filed under the one county the department assigns it, so it appears on that county's page and on no other.